Harrisburg telegraph. [volume] (Harrisburg, Pa.) 1879-1948, 1916-02-25
CHURCH UNITES TO
FIGHT ON HOTELS

Continued From First Pagel
streets-on the grounds that a hotel
in that section of the city is unneces-
sary and detrimental to the public
good.
Question Signatures on Remonstrances
The question of the legality of
some of the remonstrances was raised
by Ebel because, he contended, many
of the signatures were evidently writ
ten by the same person. Among
these. Attorney Charles II. Bergner,
his counsel, pointed out, were some
of the inmates of the Home For the
Friendless.
President Judge Kunkel inquired
with especial emphasis into why re-
monstrances bearing many signatures
that had evidently been penned by
one person in the same hand writing
should have been filed with the court.
mtemperance Only EVIL?
why" demanded the court"
should any one undertake to present
such a paper to the court? Is there
no other evil but the evil of intern
perance?" he continued. I'VE can
not understand why anyone should
presume to file papers bearing names
OF persons who apparently have not
signed. Is intemperance the only
evil? Is not deceit just as bad?"
Following the hearing in the Ebel
case, the remonstrance against the re-
Licensing Of David Katzmans Hotel,
3l4 Nerbeke street, was considered.
The fight against this place is being
Waged by the Dauphin County Law
and Order and the No-License
Leagues That liquor was sold there
10 minors, that women of question
able character were allowed to con-
greSate in the drinking rooms. and
that language of the kind that is not
countenanced by law was common, are
the reasons why the re-licensing of
this hostelry is objected to.
Girls Got No Intoxicants
The hearing of the remonstrance
against the re-licensing of the Lynch
Hotel, Capital and Verbeke streets.
was concluded late yesterday after
noon. In the course of the afternoon
testimony, the two girls, aged II and
IA. who had been furnished with
liquor, according to witnesses for the
two leagues, took the stand. Both
girls declared emphatically that they
had not been furnished with intoxi-
eating liquors but had been served
only with soft drinks"
Only half a dozen witnesses for both
licensee and emonstrants were on the
question of licensing 1902 North
Fourth street. George d. Herbert, an
alderman of the Eleventh ward.
created little smile throughout the
courtroom when he said he believed
the proposed place would be a great
convenience for several reasons"
Not only would it be a convenience
for those who might want a drink"
he explained, but it would be a place
for those who wished to lunch, or, it
would be place for a woman to get
brandy to put into her fruit cake"
Some of the citizens declined to sign
the petition, Mr.. Herbert pointed out,
because such action would hurt their
business" or because they feared it
might start an argument with their
wives"
Henry Schudemadge, Harry Hanlen
and others were among those who
thought the license necessary.
The Economic Side
G.. r. Neff, a salesman who said
he knew every businessman and many
of the statesmen who did business in
the Eleventh ward, declared that he
| never once heard anybody express
any need of a hotel in that ward. "
w. f. Burgoon, an uptown grocer, de-
| clared against the licensing of the
hotel on economic grounds.
MANY of the people in that neigh
borhood" he ptinted OUT ARE rail-
road men, and it is a well-known fact
| that men are being discharged or de-
NOTED by the company for using in
toXcants. This has its effect on busi-
ness. L have on my books men who
couldk'S pay their bills because they've
been discharged or denoted by the
/ company-for drinking"
| ]. Henry Spicer declared that ninety
/ per cent. of the people of the ward
protested against the licensing of the
/ hotel there, and he exhibited the pc
/ tition signed by more than LOO resi-
dents to that effect. 1t was this petit
tion that aroused the petitioners ire
and his attorney pointed out the ap-
parent discrepancy in the signatures
| The signatures, Ebels counsel con-
tended, did not total more than IL
/ lA1Al.n