Evening public ledger. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1914-1942, 1916-02-02


spcct the validity OF the protest of n ma
jority of the residents of n ncighborboOd
provide for the exercise of local option.
II Is q regulating and restrninlnE. not
prohihitory, statute, Public opinion, how
ever, Is n good guide 20 the court.
TT THE people who are trying to convince
Il the Judges that no liquor licenses should
be granted in Germantown and that the num-
ber of saloons in West Philadelphia should
not be increased do not succeed they ought
to refrain from easing their feelings by damn
ing the Court
The powers and duties Of the licensing
Judges have been pretty we'll established by
long series of decisions For example, It is
established that an overwhelming preponder-
ance of signatures to n demonstrating yeti
tion need not compel the Judges to refuse
license. In an appeal taken by a saloon
keeper from the decision of the Common
Pleas Judges, who had refused a license un-
der such circumstances, the higher Court
said:
In the case in hand there appears to have
been an unusual effort both for and against
the application. The number of remon-
strants considerably exceeds that Of the pc
titioners. This Is all very WELL far it
is addressed to the discretion of the court
The result Is not conclusive upon him.
Otherwise we would have local option with
out the sanction of act of Assembly
yet enforced by the judiciary.
So long as there is no law directing the
licensing authority to be guided exclusively
by formal informal referendum the
Judges must exercise the discretion with
which they are clothed. If any one is to be
damned by the Germantown and West Phila-
delphia people for a possible failure to limit
the number Of saloons according to their
wishes, it is the General Assembly, which
failed to pass the local option bill last winter.
The demonstrating petition, or informal
referendum is not safe guide to the Court
for obvious reasons. The way it works Is
well illustrated by the proceedings in the
Common Pleas Court in Crawford County
last year. A petition signed by forty-one
names asked for license for the Lafayette
Hotel in Meadville, one of the largest and
best known hotels in western Pennsylvania.
1t was accompanied by remonstrance
signed by 457 names, while 191 persons
demonstrated against granting n license to
restaurant across the street from the hotel
and 232 favored it. The Court granted both
licenses, because of its own knowledge 1t be-
leved that public convenience would be
served.
The title of the law itself is instructive. 1t
reads: "An act to regulate and restrain the
sale of vinous, malt or brewed liquors" 1t
has been decided that 1t is not a prohibitory
law, but that the restraining purpose is def
mite and clear Therefore, when the Judges
have to find out whether there is a demand
for a saloon license they must consider other
matters than would be prevailing in the case
of business which was not to be restrained.
There is demand for a grocery store in
district where enough groceries can be sold
to make the business profitable. The fact
that a saloon would make money in a given
location is not sufficient to justify granting
a license.
The point for the local remonstrants to re-
member is that the License Court has a wide
discretion, and that there is nothing in the
statutes which justifes it in accepting the
verdict of an informal referendum by petit
ton as binding upon it, The referendum must
be supplemented by other evidence. In the
Crawford County case already referred to
the Judge disregarded the petitions in grant
ing the hotel and restaurant licenses. but
when only 1923 persons asked for the granting
of wholesale license and nearly 1900 OPP
posed 1t the Court decided that public senti-
ment had been so clearly indicated that it
would be justified in refusing the license to
the wholesaler.
There is no doubt that so wide an express
sion as possible of the sentiment of German
town and West Philadelphia would be helpful
either, that woman have as much right as
men to sign the demonstrating petitions. The
views of the Supreme Court on this question
may be used to strengthen the purpose of
those circulating the petitions, The Court
said:
The act does not require that either peti-
TONERS or remonstrants should be voters;
IL is enough that they citizens, whether
male female, hence it is mistake to
pass women and count only voters.
Public opinion, however. is power with
which even the Courts must reckon. A close
vote on license cannot be conclusive and
should not be considered to inhibit the grant
ing of it. But where the remonstrants are
In so great a majority as clearly to repre-
sent the wishes of the people, their protest
is in itself an evidence that public convent
ence would not be served by granting the
license and that no necessity for a saloon
exists. A community vote. therefore, while
recommendatory only. should influence the
Court, although it cannot direct a verdict
The process is a step toward local option,
even preliminary to 1t. but citizens should
recollect that 1t is not local option. which
can be brought about only by the action of
the Legislature.