Omaha daily bee. (Omaha [Neb.]) 187?-1922, 1910-01-04
Concerns Affected Will Return Again
to Making Beer.
ANNOUNCES APPEAL
Anh-Saloon League Will Try Again
in Higher Court.
RELATION OF LAWS, ISSUE
Gibson Act Declared TO he independ-
ent of sIocumb Act, by Judge Es-
teIIe in Handing Down
His Decision,

The issuance of liquor license to The
Metz Bross Brewing company by the Fire
and Police Board OF Omaha was sustained
in the test case before Judge Estelle in
district court yesterday afternoon. The
lawyers for the Anu-Saloon league an
nounced that they would at once appeal
to the supreme court and declared that
they had the greatest confidence Of sue
cess.
The brewing company's attorneys de-
clared that their company would resume
| operations at once In that the Metz
| Bros.'s case was a test proceeding, tho
other brewing companies of the city will
probably Immediately resume operations
when licenses are granted. The Board OF
Fire and Police Commissioners will meet
at II o'clock today to consider their
| licenses.
The contest began last week, when the
Fire and Police Board, by agreement to
make test case granted license to the
Metz Bros.'s Brewing company, over the
remonstrance and objection of the Anti
Saloon league that the brewers were not
entitled to licenses on the ground that they
had violated the law by the retail sale OF
| beer
The argument in this case was long and
exhaustive ending at 6:45 o'clock after
two hours of animated debate.
Effect of Revocation.
Attorneys for the brewers contended
| that the attempt to revoke the license of
! the brewers and refusal to reissue them
would become a punishment under the
Slocum act, the general act controlling the
! liquor traffic; but that any offense that
might have been committed, II there had
been any, would properly come under the
Gibson act. The Anti-Saloon league law
yers responded with an argument to the
effect that the Slocumb act comprehended
and included the Gibson act and that any
infringement OF the Gibson act would mean
q violation of the general act Of which Il
was a part. r>l' -t
j. p. Breen made argument IN behalf OF
the breweries. John c. GOWN also an at
torney for the brewing companies. made
the closing argument In rebuttal. There
were ten lawyers for the brewing COM
panles present at the hearing.
The Anti-Saoon league was represented
by l.. d. Holmes, w. r, Patrick and Ell
mer e. Thomas.
I'VE are to appeal to the supreme court
at once from this decision" said Mr.,
Holmes, land we are almost positive Of
success in that appeal"
Relation of Two Laws.
| THE whole question really to be set
tied said Judge Estelle In rendering his
judgment, is whether this Gibson act is
incorporated in and becomes part of the
Slocumb act, or whether the Gibson law
is a separate and independent act II a
part of the Slocumb act and Incorporated
in it, the breweries would be liable to suf-
fer any penalty attached to the slocumb
act If a separate and Independent act
for and in itself and one that could stand
by itself, If the Slocumb act were re-
pealed. we would have to look TO this act
as to what would be visited upon a vlo-
lator, and l rather think that this is the
| case"
Judge Estelle then referred to his pro-
nouncement of last week. saying that ne
realized its significance to the breweries
when he made II, but that the question of
relation between the Slocumb act and the
Gibson act had not then been brought up.
MY conclusion and final view is" con-
tinued the judge, that the Fire and Police
board shall be sustained in the granting
OF license to the Metz Brothers Brewing
company"