Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1934-09-26
Drys Win Partial Victory as
Board Rules Out Three
Applicants.
0FFUTT VOTE BREAKS
SWAY SPLIT DECISION
Definition of Term "Neighbor.
hood" May Force Action Into
Courts Battle.

Control Board announced it would
issue only one of the four beverage
permits sought by Takoma retailers
that permit being for the sale of bot
tied beer and wine. The three other
applications, one of which was for
the sale OF liquor by the bottle, are
to be rejected.
The decision split the three men,
bers OF the control board three ways
IN their individual votes on the ap-
pllcations, and the solution was
reached when Chairman George w,
OHutt sided with Isaac Cans, approx
ing the issuance of a class B license
to j. S. Simpson g. Son, 1923 Carroll
street
Mrs. William Beverley Mason an
nounced she favored granting of all
four permits forthwith. Cans was
Tor Issuing only beer and wine of
sale" permits, and Chairman Of1utt
at f1rst declared he was not in favor
OF granting any.
May Go 10 Courts for Test.
The case may be carried to court
for test of the decision since it re-
Volved around an Interpretation of the
meaning of the term "neighborhood"
In the District liquor act. William E.
Leahy, counsel for the applicants.
said he would consult his clients on
the question of an appeal to court.
Session Lasts Two Hours.
When debate finally was shut of
by Offutt at the close of the two.
hour session, he announced unex-
pectedly that the three members
would take their positions indi-
| vidually.
Mrs. Mason said the District Com
missioners had the power to declare
Takoma dry zone and that she al
ways had regarded a neighborhood as
being the area within 600 feet of the
place of the applicant For this reason.
she said she favored issuing all re-
| quested permits.
Cans said he recognized a division
OF opinion in the neighborhood and
that Congress at the past session had
amended the law to permit the grant,
| ing of beer permits in residential
| areas. He said he saw no harm in
the sale of beer and, therefore, would
approve the "off sale" permit applica-
tions. He did not discuss the oues-
ton Of "neighborhood"
Cites Numerous Protests.
Chairman Offutt said he regarded
the term ''neighborhood" in this case
as involving the whole community,
and mot rnara1xy thu rr-ftI
feet of the places of the applicants.
| He, therefore. voted against granting
Of any permits since petitions on file
show l ,092 protesting against any per-
mits and $40 petitioning for some
kind of license.
He said that if it was found by
court decision that the 600-foot rule
| estab lished the limit of what is
neighborhood, he would be compelled
| to approve granting of all requested
permits.
The fight Of dry residents of
Takoma to keep it a non-icensed
area was led by Attorney George E.
Sullivan of the Citizens Association
of Takoma, D. c., who told the board
Congress clearly provided in the liquor
control act that the wishes of
neighborhood are to be considered.
| At the outset of the hearing, Chair
man Ofutt announced the control
board agrees that all the license ap-
| plicants are of good character and
| that the places where licenses have
been applied for are appropriate ones.
He suggested, therefore, that counsel
for both sides direct their arguments
to the question of what is meant by
that part of the liquor law which re-
fers to considering the wishes of per-
sons residing in or owning property
In the neighborhood Of applications.
Names Held No Disapproval.
Before turning to this legal question
Leahy argued that petitions signed BY
names are not entitled to consider
! alton, because the board does not
know the reasons individuals may have
had for signing. He contended the
law requires opposition to be expressed
at public hearings and that the Con-
troll Board must decide applications
from the standpoint of public interest
generally rather than community in
terests of locality.
Leahy took the position that general
opposition to the sale of alcoholic
beverages should not cause the board
to deny licenses, because Congress
decided when it passed the law that
alcoholic beverages could be sold in
the District. Opposition to applica-
lions, he said, would have to be based
on specific grounds, such as proximity
to schools or churches.
| Counsel for the applicants also argued
that Takoma Is no more a residential
area than Brightwood or any other
part of the city because it has bust.
ness zone within its boundary.
Replying to Leahy's arguments, Mr.,
Sullivan vigorously took issue with
Leahy's Interpretation of the liquor act.
Cites Congress Own View.
1--WE have had from the VETS" Sui
Ivan began, the confession that every
place should not be wet, and Congress
in framing the liquor law took the
vets at their own say-so. Congress
said we will hold you to what you have
said. We will provide that community
wishes be respected. Congress said we
will not force a wet community to be
dry or dry area to be made wet"
MIR. Sullivan had previously brought
out that petitions previously filed by
those opposing the granting of any
| licenses in that area show that Ia
koma is overwhelmingly against the
granting of any licenses. He recalled
that under the Jones' Works law Of
1918, which regulated the sale Of
liquor before prohibition, Congress
provided for a number of dry areas
in Washington, including Takoma.
and that 1t again recognized this prin.
ciple Of Unlicensed areas In writing