The Washington herald., 1913-09-16
EXCISEMEN HEAR
WOMEN CASE
Board Listens to Lawyers on
Jones-Works Act
Provisions.
MAY BAR FEMALES
Hk.;r, CLo~L, c.. Ali A.
MAY BAR FEMALES
Chairman Sheehy Says Authorities Are
Considering Restriction Regulation.
Early Decision Expected.

Legal arguments on the question OF the
Excise Boards power to issue liquor
licenses TO women were heard by the
board at a hearing granted to the woman
applicants in the board-room of the Mu-
nicipal Building yesterday afternoon.
Decision OF the board was reserved.
During the hearing, however, Chairman
Sheehy stated that the board was con-
sdering a regulation to bar women from
the saloon business.
Attorney Henry +. Davis. representing
women saloon-keepers, opened the argu-
ments. He submitted that not only has
the board the power for granting such
licenses, but that il would be exceeding
its authority, and. in effect, amending
the Jones-Works measure, if il decides
against granting liquor license renewals
that women licensees have placed be-
lore it.
Argument of Mr.. Davis.
Mr.. Davis pointed out that the new law
provides: not, that no woman may enter
a barroom, but that the Iicensee shall
not permit any female TO enter or remain
in the barroom. This, he said. clearly
does not apply to the women who may
be the proprietors. Nor. he stated, is
there any provision of the JoneS-wo
law. that can be logically cited as a
basis for the exclusion of women from
the liquor traffic in the District.
In an examination OF the excise law
Mr.. Davis said, he found two rights
that were expressly taken away by such
legislation; the right OF employing fe-
males in barroOms, and the right of
serving females in barrooms. The intent
OF lawmakers in these two instances.
were in the first instance. to provide
against the employment of females in
baTrooms as enticements 10 men, and
in the second instance. to guard against
a potential immortality. Neither of these
intents has application, he said, where
the women in the barrooms are its pro-
prietoTs, and. therefore. concerned in its
good fame.
Right Always Recognized.
He stated that he was able TO find
no other ground assigned for legislation
restricting womens connection with sa-
looms.
Attorney Davis argued that, as the
right of conducting saloons had been
for twenty years as being
equally shared by women, it was
than presumption to expect
that Congress would have expressly
denied this right, had such denial been
It's intent. This the Jones-Works law
does not do.
You have got to find more than a
doubtful implication in the new stat
Ite," Mr.. Davis exclaimed, before you !
,an take away from these women the !
Il ght TO coadUct a legitimate business"
In summing up, Mr.. Davis stated that /
woman might conduct a saloon busi- !
ness without being present in the sa- |
DON. He said that the provision for |
personal supervision made by Con- |
yress did not necessarily demand that |
he women be actually present in the |
1arroom. He cited court definitions
# the word personal" The intent |
# Congress in adopting this provision |
vas. he said, to force the true pro-
,rietors of bars to disclose their iden-
ity, and not hide behind licenses is
ued in the names of their employees.
his argument. he said:
If / were forced to choose between
men and women saloonkeepers.
would choose the women, and exclude