The Cairo bulletin. [volume] (Cairo, Ill.) 1872-1878, 1873-10-10
ILLINOIS LIQUOR LAW
TITS HELD TO BE CONST1TU-
TIONAL BY THE SU-
pREME COURT.
OPINION OF JUSTICE SCOTT, DE
LIVERED ON The lST
INSTANT.

This was prosecution commenced
before justice of the peace against
the appellant, for selling intoxicating
liquors without liccuce. The justice
found him guilty, and assessed fine
of $50 against him, and rendered
judgement accordingly. On the appeal
taken to the circuit court, the cause
was submitted on an agreed state of
facts, and the court, pro forma, found
the appellant guilty, and entered
judgement against him ofS20 and costs.
From the statement of facts it APP
pears the appellant resides near the
city of Ottawa, in LaSalle county, but
not within the limits of any incorpora-
ted town or city; that he has never
given the requisite bond and obtained
licence to keep grocery as required
by the first section Of an act entitled
An act to provide against the evils
resulting from the sale of intoxicating
liquors in the state of Illinois, APP
proved January 49, ISL and at hls
residence, as stated, he has repeatedly
sold intoxicating liquors in a quantity
less than one quart, to any person VINO
desired TO purchase, to be drank on his
premises by the glass, and the liquors
so sold were drank by the persons pur-
chasing on his premises, by his per-
mission.
Its provided, in the first section Of
the act under which this prosecution
was commenced, it shall be unlawful
for any person not having obtained a
hcence to keep grocery, to sell in
any quantity, Intoxicating liquors to
be drank on the premises where sold
or in any adjoining room, or in any
place Of public resort connected there
with, and no person shall be granted
licence without first giving bond t
the municipality or authority author
lied by law to grant licence, in tn
penal sum Of $4,000, with two sufii
cient securities, which shall be condi
toned aud for the purposes therein di
rectcd,
The second section provides it shal
be unlawful for any person to sell in
toxicating liquors to minors excep
upon the written authority of thci
parents, guardians, or family physi
clans, or to persons intoxicated
or who are in the habit Of getting in
toxicatcd.
In the third section it is provided, al
places wherein intoxicating liquors ar,
sold in violation of this act shall b
taken, held, and declared to be common
nuisances, and all such places shall b
shut and abated, on the conviction O
the keeper thereof.
The sixth section declares what per
: altics shall be inflicted on tho porsor
! violating the provisions of the first al
? second sections of this act.
i The admitted facts show clear vic
=. lation of the first section of the statut
but not of the second.
=, IL is insisted a conviction cannot b
maintained unless the evidence shows
violation of the first and second sec
tons. The objection seems hypocrit
zeal. 1t is founded on the peculia
phraseology of the sixth section, whicI
imposes the penalties, and which pro
yides that every person guilty of viola
ting the provisions Of the "frst and sec
| ond sections shall forfeit and pay Ger
tain penalties.
| The penalties imposed by that sec
/ ton are for the violation of either sec
ton, and it is not indispensable part,
should be guilty Of violation of boil
before he can be subjected to the for
FIXTURES enoumerated. This is the oh
vious meaning of the words used, anC
is the construction given to the sam
language in the statute Of Ohio on tn
subject, in Miller, V. the State @ o
Ohio, AID. Our statute, in many re
,pects, is a substantial, and in othe
parts literal Transcript of the Ohi
law, and it is a rule that, when the leg
islature adopts substantially the stat
ute of another state, it is presume,
also to adopt the construction previ
ously given it by that state, unles sucl
construction is inconsistent with tn,
spirit and policy Of our laws. (Rgg
ct al Y. Wilton ct al, L. Ills. Rep, 10
Campbell V. Quinlin, 3 Scam, 2ss.)
| 1t is urged, the clause of the thirt
section, which declares that all place,
where intoxicating liquors are cold il
violation Of this act to be common
nuisances, and shall be shut up OF
abated, authorizes the destruction Of
private property, and, therefore, con.
trayenes constitutional law.
The construction Of this section i,
not involved, directly, in the decision
of this case. Counsel, however, is in
error in supposing it authorizes III,
summary destruction Of private prop
erty. 1t authorizes no such thing. II
simply declares all places where intox
icatne liquors are sold in violation OF
TINS act common nuisauces, and pro.
yideS that they may be shut up and
this traffic carried on there abated
The object Is TO prevent the assemblare
Of idle and eyil-disp jsed persons. for
the purpose Of violating the laws of the
state. Under what is called the polic,
power, the legislature has the right To
authorize the abatement of publ,
nuisance and the carrying on of an il,
legal traffic in intoxicating liquors, and
the assembling of idle and vicious per,
sons for that purpose, as nuisances