Evening star., 1915-02-25
DEFENDS ACTION
Of EXCISE BOARD
Continued from First Page)

i vi LNUIOL UUHNU
CONTINUED from First Page.)
! license and the time when it changed
| to Engel.
Demands Reasons for Change.
Senator Jones piled Gen. Smith with
| questions to learn just what had been
| the cause of the change and who had
brought the matter up at the meeting
,, of the board when the change was ef-
| fected.
| Had any senator or representative
spoken to you about Engel or Bush?''
demanded Senator Jones.
Gen. Smith admitted that some SEN
ator or representative might have
spoken to him about Bush or Engel,
but not during the interval in which
the board changed its decision regard
political Influence nor the influence of
any brewers had been brought to bear
in this case.
Taking up the cases where licenses
400 feet of the Salvation Army bar
racks at $50 Pennsylvania avenue and
the Central Union Mission. senators
asked the witness why the board had
|
Gen. Smith replied that the board
had construed the language of the law
not to include such places.
| THE language of the law is to the
ed to barroom within 400 feet Of a
house of religious worship. The lam
guage originally was a place Of re-
ligious worship. Evidently Congress in
that house of religious worship was
to be used exclusively for religious
purposes
He said that in the opinion of the
and Central Union Mission were not
| in this category. He admitted that
both institutions had protested against
| the granting of the licenses.
Considers Both Sides.
I'VE have a duty to perform to the
saloon man as we'll as to the church
man." said Gen. Smith In support Of
the boards decision. He admitted that
the board had construed the law to
mean that there should be 300 barroom
! licenses granted in the District The
members of the committee pointed out
| that the law merely stated that there
should not be more than 800.
| Il am glad there are not more" said
Gen. Smith
The cases of the saloon at 1921 6
street northwest, located within 400
| feet of the Temple Business College
and of a saloon within the same dis
tance of the Drillery Business College,
| were discussed. Gen. Smith admitted
that licenses had been granted for
saloons near these colleges, but said
tablished colleges" within the meaning
of the law.
| Senator Sheppard questioned Gen
Smith about alleged violations OF the
provision of the law which says that
the board shall issue no license to a
hotel having less than fifty rooms for
guests. He called attention to the
De Alley Hotel, at 1922 Pennsylvania
avenue northwest, and that of Henry NJ.
Marks, at 1000 f street northwest. Each
he said, has less than fifty rooms.
| Senator Sheppard asked if they had not
been licensed as hotels by the District
| Commissioners.
I'VE have nothing to do with what
DONE" replied Gen. Smith. I'VE have
| control over the issue of liquor licenses
and we did not license these places
with less than fifty rooms as hotels"
| But you knew that these places were
operated as hotels,' Senator Sheppard
| remarked.
IT don't know: it may have been
shown in the hearings" said Gee.
| Smith.
"wouldn't it be your duty" said SEN
place had been licensed as hotel to
take cognizance Of that fact in passing
upon an application for Iicense?'
| Gen. Smith said he did not think so,
! and that these places had shown they
were equipped as restaurants.
:, Licenses in Residence Districts.
| In reply to a question regarding the
issue of licenses to clubs and hotels To-
Gated in residence districts. Gen. Smith
| told the committee that the board had
believed that it was an oversight by
| Congress not to specifically exempt
these clubs and hotels. For that rea-
son. he said, the licenses were granted.
Did you know anything about the
manner in which the Grand Hotel was
conducted before the board issued a
license to it?" inquired Senator Shep-
pard.
I'VE heard many things, both for and
| against 1t" was the reply.
! WAS not Edward j. Gardner a men,
| ber of the corporation and owner of
| the controlling interests in the hotel?''
asked Senator Sheppard. Gen. Smith
| replied that he was.
| WAS not he convicted of selling
| liquor to a minor and his license taken
away when he conducted the hotel as a
| private individual?' asked Senator
Sheppard. Gen. Smith said he could
|
| it might have been brought out at the
hearing when an application for a
| license was pending.
Evidence outweighs Police Reports.
/ Did not the police make report de-
claring the place to be a resort Of i'll
fame?" asked Senator Sheppard.
The witness admitted that this was
so. but said that evidence produced for
the hotel had outweighed the reports
| of the police.
Senator Sheppard asked whether the
! board had not been told that the man.
ner in which the Ebbitt House bar was
conducted was such as to warrant a re-
fusal to renew the license Of that hotel;
Gen Smith said that testimony had
| been taken, but it was given by a dis
missed employe of the hotel and had
not been taken seriously by the board
During the hearing Senator Sheppard
asked Gen Smith II any senators or
. representatives had ever interested