Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1917-10-24
DRY LAW
IS |SUPHELDBY COURT
Justice Gould Denies Injunction
Asked by Seven Sa-
Ioonkeepers.
DEALERS NOTE AN APPEAL

justice Gould or the DlStrlct supreme
Court today sustained the constitution
ality of the Sheppard dry law. He de-
MED the injunction asked by seven sa-
loonkeepers and dismissed their peti-
tions.
The liquor dealers noted an appeal to the
District Court of Appeals. and declared
their intention of seeking hearing from
the United States Supreme Court in the
event of an adverse ruling by the appel
late tribunal of the District.
The petition of Moses Dade, the seventh
saloonkeeper, was received by the court
today and included in the decision rem
dered in the six cases which were argued
yesterday.
Justice Gould upheld all the contentious
Of Corporation Counsel Syme. He ex-
pressed doubt as to the validity OF one
section of the act which deals with COM
pulsory testimony Of witnesses, but even
if that section Is invalid. the court point
ed out. it does not invalidate the law
which expressly provides that the re
manning sections shall not be anected pS
the unconstitutionality OF one OF more
sections.
Point Is Well Taken
The court declared that the point
made by Mr.. Syme against the stand
ing of the saloonkeepers In court OF
equity was well taken. The Iallule 70
apply for a renewal Of license under
tionary power vested in the excise
board to deny applications, gave the
saloonkeepers, the court said. no prop
erty-right. as is necessary to confer
Jurisdiction on court OF eaui.s
United States Supreme Court has de-
.nied any right Of property in the sale
of liquor. As much as thirty years ago,
he said, that tribunal had declared the
liquor traffic menace to society. and
had stated that public health. public
morals and public safety are menaced
by its sale
The court was not disposed to pass
on the point of jurisdiction. but entered
into lengthy discussion on the valid
ity of the law. He took up point by
point the claims made by the liquor
dealers, through Attorneys d. w. Baker
and ]. c. De Putron, and ruled adverse
Iy against each. in order.
Merely a Tax, Court Holds.
The internal revenue license relied on
by the 1saloonkeepers. the court held. is
merely a tax and not a license for the
sale of intoxicants. He suggested that
even with q revenue license the saloon
keeper must obtain a nsense iIom sne
sell liquor To hold that the United
states could not give a revenue license
and then prohibit the sale OF liquor in
Jurisdiction over which 1t had exclusive
control was to apply the law of estop-
mel to the government, the court said.
This the court doubted its right to do.
By no process of reasoning, said JUS
tice Gould, could he see how the bill
could be called a revenue act, as II pro
yided only for inconsiderable license fees
against a former revenue OF $45O,000
annually The bill, in his opinion. said
the court. was unquestfonapiy pro,
hibitory act against the manufacture and
sale of Intoxicating liquor. That 1t In
cidentally raised a small revenue did not
change the nature of the enactment, he
decided.
Failed to Go Far Enough.
The only claim of discrimination that
could be laid to Congress In the passage
of the act, the court declared. was its
failure to go far enough In its prohibi-
ton. Because Congress could nave
nassed Z bone dry law and did not do
SO does not make the Sheppard act un-
constitutional said Justice Could
Touching on the claim of the Hquor
dealers that the act violates the con-
stitutional provision for the free exer-
else of religion. Justice Gould SAID ne
had read the provision relating 10 tne
sale of wine for sacramental purposes.
and remarked:
IF any one is prohibited thereby
from following the dictates OF his con-
science / am unable 10 see IT."
The only objection that the clergy
men can make to this provision. the
court suggested. Is that they are put
to a little more trouble. as the law pro-
yides a rather complicated method for
securing wine for the sacrament. The
Justice suggested that they should not
object to this additional trouble.
there was, in his judgment. no virtue
in the claim that the law is difficult
of enforcement. The methods used
throughout the land to carry out the
provisions of regulatory or prohibitory
laws against the liquor traffic gave
promise of little difficulty of putting
the Sheppard law into effect in WASH
;p0 he stated.