« PreviousContinue »
Judge Arthur J. Tuttle of the United States District Court, for the Eastern District of Michigan, notified the receivers of the Pere Marquette railroad to refrain from selling any liquor on any of the Pere Marquette lines in Michigan, as long as the Pere Marquette remains in the hands of the court, with the law in its present form. In the case of the People v. Eberle, which was decided this summer in the United States Supreme Court, the court upholds the validity of the local option or county prohibition law in Michigan.
The Eberle Brewing Company was charged with having manufactured beer in a county, after it voted dry, in violation of the statute. Their defense was that the beer was not manufactured for sale, but to be used in causing re-fermentation of 1,600 barrels of beer which were on hand at the date of the election, with a view to making it saleable, and thereby saving themselves from The defendants were not charged with selling beer which was in their possession when the Local Option Law went into effect, but with manufacturing beer several months after its adoption. The Court ruled that the fact that this beer may have been made for use in starting re-fermentation does not affect the principle involved, for the right to manufacture beer to be utilized in giving value to an unfinished brew is no more protected by the Constitution than the right to manufacure beer to utilize the brewery, and thereby preserve the value of the plant. Liquor laws may operate to depreciate the principal value of distilleries, breweries, and other property in use and on hand when the law is passed, but it has been held in many cases that such depreciation is not the taking of property prohibited by the Constitution.
On April 6, 1914, county prohibition elections were held in twelve counties, of which eight were then dry and four were then wet, with the following results:
Previous to this election there were 33 dry counties and 50 wet counties. There are now 34 dry counties and 49 wet counties. Clare County returned to license.
Holland abolished the saloon six years ago, and since that time the liquor question has been submitted four times, the dry majorities dwindling from over 500 to 37 votes. At the special election June 6th, the licensed saloon won by 222, out of a total of 2,051
The Circuit Court at Bay City, decided that Ogemaw County would remain in the license column, the election having been legal.
The Supreme Court held in the case of People v. Averill that a sale by a liquor dealer to a person in good faith, believing the purchaser to be of age, did not violate the law, forbidding the sale of liquor to a minor.
Minnesota: A number of cities and villages located in the socalled Indian country, viz, the territory covered by the Treaty of February 22nd, 1855, have passed ordinances prohibiting the sale of intoxicating liquors in bottles. The ordinance requires that whatever is purchased shall be consumed on the premises. This, of course, affects retailers. The ordinances were enacted for the purpose of preventing intoxicants from going to the Indians.
The following is a summary of the result of local option elections held during the past year:
Towns wet by no vote..
Towns wet by vote..
This is quite an increase over that of the preceding year. Breckenridge voted for license, 362 to 110; and Berridge voted 583 wet and 343 dry.
Two important decisions were rendered by the Supreme Court of the State.
Section 3142 General Statutes, 1913, forbids the sale of intoxicating liquor within one-half mile of a town or municipality which has voted no-license. The Court held that the half mile zone which may thus by vote of the adjacent town or municipality become closed against the saloon, cannot embrace any territory within a village or city: Ex Parte Miller, 147 Northwestern Reporter, page 660, May 29, 1914.
Chapter 484, Laws 1913, prohibiting the soliciting of orders for the sale of intoxicating liquors within dry territory was declared by the same Court to be constitutional, as not being an unreasonable restraint upon the freedom of private contracts-State v. Droppo, 147 Northwestern Reporter, page 829, June 12, 1914.
The Supreme Court of the United States sustained the contention of the Government in the case of Johnson v. Geralds, et al, that Article 7 of the Treaty of 1855, prohibiting the introduction of intoxicating liquors into the territory covered by the Treaty of 1855, was still in force. The ceded territory constitutes the greater portion of the State north of the 46th parallel, in which at present about 7,000 Indians and more than 382,000 white people are living. A petition for rehearing was filed, but denied by the Court and the question of the enforcement of the Treaty prohibition is now up to the Department of the Interior.
Judge Roeser of Fergus Falls rendered a decision holding that the City Charter provision forbidding the sale of intoxicants by manufacturers is contrary to the general policy of the State and that the Fergus Brewing Co. has a right to sell its beer for con
sumption outside of the City of Fergus Falls, the provision of the City Charter to the contrary notwithstanding.
Mississippi:-There was only one law affecting the liquor interests passed by the Legislature this year. This is known as the MayMott-Lewis Act, and prohibits the shipment of intoxicants into and within the State, except to persons over 21 years of age, giving their address and a written statement that they will not use the contents of packages addressed to them in violation of the Prohibition Law of Mississippi; railroads and express companies not to be liable for nondelivery; packages to be labeled: "This package contains intoxicating liquors;" persons desiring to use intoxicants may carry them to their own homes in quantities not exceeding one gallon; beer may be shipped to homes in quantities not exceeding one keg, shipments to be made from places where the sale of intoxicants is legal; punishment for violations to be from $100 to $500, or imprisonment from 30-60 days, or both; soliciting for orders and advertising of intoxicants to be unlawful.
The Supreme Court of the State has declared that the MayMott-Lewis Act is valid. An appeal from this decision will be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States.
The Attorney General ruled on April 8th, that newspapers are not prohibited from printing liquor advertisements under the provisions of the May-Mott-Lewis Law.
After having been for four years the largest dry city in Missouri, Webb City on June 9th voted for licensed saloons by 1,435
The Supreme Court declared the election at which Mexico went dry to be legal.
In Kansas City the Appellate Court held that the steward of a bona fide club, who sells liquor to the members, without profit, does not violate the dram shop law, even though no license has been taken out by him or the club.
In the case of State v. Crider the Court of Appeals upheld the conviction of a person for selling cider, which was declared intoxicating.
New Hampshire:-The Anti-Saloon League is well supplied with money and is prosecuting an earnest campaign throughout the State. New Hampshire and Vermont are so largely rural that the Anti-Saloon League has marked them as possible additions to the Prohibition States.
A hotly contested local option fight in this State November 3rd resulted in the gain of one city, Franklin, and the loss of none of the license cities. The following cities have voted license for the coming four years:
Berlin, Concord, Dover, Franklin, Manchester, Nashua, Portsmouth, Somersworth.
Newport, Newmarket and North Walpole voted dry; Raymond and Colebrook voted wet. The licensed towns for the coming two years will be:
Allenstown, Alstead, Andover, Bennington, Colebrook, Derry, Epping, Francestown, Groveton, Kingston, Pembroke, Raymond, Rollinsford.
The general results of the election indicate a sentiment for the retention of the local option law with the licensing of hotels in nolicense cities and towns.
New Jersey:-The Local Option Bill made its annual appearance at the 1914 session of the State legislature but never reached a third hearing.
A supplement bill to the Bonded Warehouse Certificate Bill, passed in 1910 requiring the printing of the word "duplicate" in red letters and in larger type where a certificate did not actually repre