Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1913-10-25
Believes Old License Holders
AmenabIe to Terms of
New Regulations.
CASE OF C. H. MORRIS
is UNDER AMUSEMENT
Alleged Violation of Law in Gen.
Quoting Saloon Poolroom
Argued in Court.

Judge Mullowny today gave an indica-
ton OF his attitude toward the excise
law In statement from the bench. his
remarks applying particularly to those
parts OF the new law which refer To IT,
censees under this section"
The statement was made during the
hearing on a statement of fact submitted
and argued by Attorney Lorenzo a.
Bailey, who represents Charles IL Nor
ris, proprietor of a saloon at 1850 X
street northwest, charged with violating
the new law by running pooroom in
connection with his bar.
The judge said that, I'm his opinion. tho
new act authorized holders of licenses
granted under the old liquor law to con-
tinue their business until such time as
new licenses were granted, but changed
the terms of the licenses.
Quotes Different Stipulations.
AS an illustration, Judge Mullonny
quoted the different stipulations In the
two acts in regard to the sale of liquor
to minors. Under the old law if the
minor served had the appearance of be-
ing of legal age, this fact was taken into
consideration, while under the existing
law this fact is not to be taken into con-
sideration in trying license holders
charged with that offense.
Attorney Bailey pointed out that In
the new excise law there was not word
respecting licenses which referred to the
old law. and nothing continues them from
the time the new law became effective
until November l. when new licenses are
issued Mr.. Bailey added that the old
law was repealed July L.,
do you think. them Judge Mulowny
asked. that the liquor dealers of the
city are now under no law at all? That
any one can sell liquor TO any one else,
and that no prosecutions are legal for
any acts done by them untils after No
vember IL"
Declines to Commit Himself.
Mr.. Bailey said he wouldn't like to
commit himself on that point unless il
was necessary. but that he believed the
references in the new law TO licensees
under this section" couldn't be taken to
mean anything but just what they indi-
Gated.
IF Congress had intended to make pros
ecutions possible prior to the issuance of
licenses November L.. the attorney said.
surely the words under this section
| would have been omitted I'm the many
places in which they appear in the Jones'
Works liquor law.
tine question IL whether nay client
is licensee under this section prior
to the time he is issued license UNI
der 1t. My opinion was asked on this
question some time ago. and after con-
sulting the law, l wrote an opinion in
effect what l have contended today.
1t is my understanding that this
opinion, which was shown to Capt
Byrnes of the sixth precinct, was sub
mitted. to Mr.. Thomas, the corporation
counsel and that he took the Same
view OF It." ''' $
Holds Judgment in Allegiance.
Judge Mullowny said he leaned in
great part on the views of all statutes
taken by the corporation counsel. as
the representative of the community.
and would prefer to hold his final
| Judgment on the statement of fact in
the case in allegiance until next sat
urday, in order that 1t night be defi-
nitely ascertained whether such was
the attitude of the corporation coun-
sci.
Mr.. Bailey assured the court that In
case Of an adye Sc holding by Judge
MulIowny he would take the matter to
the Court>Cf Appeals, providing an ex-
ception was allowed and writ of error
issued.
Mr.. Morris was permitted To go free on
his own recognizance until the ,bnal dis
position of the case. His attorney as
sured the court that Mr.. Morris was moi
defying the court 81 the laws. but had
continued to conduct his pool tables only
on advice of counsel Since the ga = has
has been discontinued. Mr. Bailey said