Evening journal., 1914-06-11

the Legislature inserted the word
particularly, and it undoubtedly in
serted il for some purpose II must
be given some meaning in constituting
the statute 1t must have some force
and effect. The designation of Al
house by street and number is th .
common, ordinary method, and such
designation cannot be deemed, 10
ordinary understanding, to be par
ticular designation Almost all
houses are numbered: in fact, the law
provided for the numbering of houses,
and the designation of houses hy
number is nothing more or less than
the common and ordinary way in
/ which houses are designated, and
anyone would consider that a desig-
mating OF any house by street and
| number was no particular designa-
tion Of that house."
After quoting several authorities as
to what is a Sufficient description Of
the premises" Judge Churchman
said:
IL Us apparent that the foregoing
general observations, which have
been deduced from the statutes of the
various states, by the writer's, and
from which they have reached the
conclusion stated. cannot apply 10
this State, because OF the peculiar
! wording OF the language Of orr
I statute, which is not found in the
I statutes Of other States
"But even though our statute
J should be considered as within the
+ foregoing general statement OF the
/ law, as % the description of the pro-
misses, ! cannot see that designating
place or describing a place by street
and nuraber falls within the purview
/ of those authorities.
1T cannot be contended that the
/ street and humber of place is such
a description of the premises as IN
/ dicates its exact location, as stated
4 in the first authority quoted: or that
/ the street and number constitutes the
description Of a house.
II agree with Counsel for the ue-
/ fendant that the object of the Legis-
4 lature in inserting these provisions m
the statutes was twofold: first, to give
4 the information to the public Of the
exact location of the place for which
! the applicant desired a license; and
+ secondly, to fix the place TO some de-
gree Of certainty, so that sales would
be restricted TO that certain place.
/ Therefore, the test would seem to be:
Did the licensee furnish such a desig-
nation OF the place, and such a des-
/ erlption OF the house as would inform
the put Of the exact location of the
/ place, and was the place fixed to such
a reasonably certain place as to pre-
clude the possibility of doubt? Did
the public know, or could the public
know that the applicant, who par
ticularly designated his place, and
also described the house as at a GER
tain number on a certain street, un-
der a license granted for the given
number and street, intended to con
duct the business at another number
on another street; or at some other
number than the place designated;
or at a number next door to the NUM-
4 ber given?
Il am very clear in the opinion
that the public could not SO under
stand, and the designation OF the
place is therefore faulty and imper-
feet because such a description docs
not give them the information which
It was the intention of the Legisla-
ture to provide. The second object Of
the Legislature also fails, when an
applicant for license designates his
place in such a manner, because no
one can tell by the mere number and
street, the exact location, and the
place is not fixed to any reasonable
degree of certainty by such desig-
nation.
THE law provides that a man may
sell at one place only, but it is silent
as to where at that one place he may
sell. Therefore, il follows that he
may sell at any number OF places, If
1t is at the place particularly desig-
mated and at the house described IN
the petition.
mo one can tell by the mere num-
Der of q house whether or not that
house runs back to another street, or
adioins nther houses or places under
the same number; nor can they tell
when the house is designated at a
certain corner of certain named in
tersecting streets, that the house also
includes three or four or five other
numbers, uron one of those inteIsect-
ing streets.
In carrying out the intent OF the
license Jaw, the Court of General Ses-
sions, in passing upon the appliea-
tons, cannot tell by such a descrip-
ton that the property Of the appli-
cant extends back to another street
in which he proposes to carry on the
business under the license granted .
nor can they tell, or have they any
way to know, that the place intended
also includes another place under
another number.
From every viewpoint. one IS
drawn irresistibly to the conclusion
that the designation of the place un-
der our statute is not met By stating
the same 10 he at a certain number az
a certain street, or at the intersec-
tion Of certain named intersecting
streets.
For the reasons given above, am
clear that the designation stated, IS
not a strict compliance with the
statutory requirements.
The next question is Can the
licensee justify a sale under such a
license? In other words. Is such 4
license void or only voidable9
"0n this question I am OF the
opinion, after carefully reviewing all
of the authorities. that the license Is
only voidable, and not void. / shall
take up the matter, in considering the
next question presented.
Judge Churchman next took up the
question that was raised and argued,
that of Jurisdiction of the Court OF
General Sessions" He says at the
outset:
"The Legislature of this State no.
where granted general jurisdiction in
the matter of liquor licenses to the
Court Of General Sessions. The only