The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1890-10-04

am inclined to the opinion that every person so
arrested and found guilty of intoxcation
should, in addition to the usual fine of five dol
lars. be sentenced to Imprisonment in the house
OF correction for period of thirty days; and
that discretionary power be vested in the
magistrate to withhold the execution of such
sentence of imprisonment, when. in his opinion.
the witness has without equivocation or eva
sion, disclosed as the statute requires. such "A
sentence may at first seem harsh and uncalled
for: The intoxicated person has usually been
looked upon more as an unfortunate victim of
appetite than y vioator of law; but.when it
appears that to his misfortune he has deiber-
ately joined the the crime of perjury, all will
admit that he has passed from the realm Of
pity and should be vigorously dealt with.
With such discretionary power lodged in the
magistrate, there can be no fear that simple
unfortunate inebriate will suffer from the in
creased penalty.
CHANCERING OF BONDS.
Another avenue of escape through which
guilty men escape the penalty of Imprisonment
and the other penalties provided by the law
for violation of the same is that of forfeit
ing the condition of bonds given for their APP
pearance for trial. and afterwards. through
their bondsmen, making application to the
court to chancer the same.
Section ,163 of the Revised Laws provides
that such suretes may file a motion to chancer,
and that the court may hear the parties and
render judgment. This may be a humane pro-
vision in some classes of cases. but that it has
resulted in disaster in its application to cases
arising under the statute relating to ntqxi-
eating drinks not be denied. Under our
present system the presiding Judge in our
county courts comes to each county not oftener
than once in two years. He is not acquainted
with the men brought before him. Plausible
statements made respecting the reason why
the respondent failed to take trial. His
bondsmen mot infrequently the counsel ma king
the statement is one of them make pitiful ap-
psals for relief and it often happens that
man who should have been imprisoned for his
crime not only escapes that disgrace by the
payment of money. but by the payment of n
sum grossly inadequate to the measure of his
offence The extent to which this evil has
proceeded may be illustrated by calling atten-
ton to two or three instances that have been
brought to my notice of the exercise of this
discretionary power the part of the courts.
AT a recent term in one of our counties a man
stood as respondent in three criminal prosecu-
tions under the liquor acts He forfeited his
bail in each of them. and so avoided trials and
convictions. The states attorney, as in duty
bound, caused writs of Scire fdcidS to issue
against the respondent and his boudsmen. which
were entered at the next term of court. In
each of these cases n motion to chaucer was
filed In the mean time the respondent had
continued his unlawful traffic and at the last
named term of court convicted in three
distinct cases in which he was charged with
Illegal sales. In face of the fact that he was
an old offender and that since the forfeiture of
the bonds. as aforesaid. he had pefsistently
followed this illegal traffic the cour; before
whom he was convicted cbaucered the bonds
forfeited at the previous term, reducing them
from the sum of four hundred dollars to the
sum of thirty dollars. Thus encouraged. this
man is, | am informed. still conducting a most
profitable business. Another man. also a we'll
known violator of the law. was convicted al
single term of court under two charges of
maintaining nuisance. and one charge growing
out OF the disclosure of an intoxicated person
yet, in the face of established guilt. the court
chancered bonds forfeited by this man at pre-
vious term from the sum of four hundr d dol
lars to the sum of twenty dollars and the
respondent continues his business with an as
surance OF undistWbed peace After a full
consideration of this subject. | am satisfied
that the right TO chancer bonds given in liquor
cases should be taken from the court. In other
classes of crime there is not much danger
that the proofs against the respondent can. or
will be. dsspated by delay of six months.
and if i'll such eases the bondsmen produce
their principal i'll court there is equity in their
| claim that they should be relieved of the opera
ton OF the bond. the condition of which has
been broken; but in ordinary liquor cases eX-
perience has proved that delay of six months
ordinarily results III an acquittal, and even
though the bondsmen surrender their principal
after such forfeiture, or he be brought in on a
bench warrant issued by the court, proofs of
! ms. guilt have become wanting that he
usually goes free, or is let off on trfng pen
atty. Let the bonds be enforced and am sat
isted that the practice of forfeiting them will
cease in all cases save those where a conviction
must be followed by imprisonment and certain
others where the business is so prosperous that
the respondent is willing to pay the amount of
the bond Tor an opportunity to continue it
another six months. In this connection ] COM
mend to the consideration of the general assem-
bly, the fact that in the United States courts
the power to chancer bonds given by way of
recognzance is not recognized by statute, nor
by the published rules of practice and | feel
confident that a denial of this right to our
courts, in all cases arising under the liquor
laws of the state, will aid materially i'll the adj
ministration of justice and will work no wrong
to any individual
NUISANCE ACT.
Another obstacle, and one to my mind one
of the most serious to the successful enforce
ment of the law, is the construction that some
of the lsdges OF our supreme court have placed
upon the so-called nuisance act, statute bet
ter suited to the purpose of really closing the
saloon than any other now found in the volume
OF our laws. Section ;iS3G of the Revised
Laws provides that " every saloon, restaurant.
grocery, cellar, shop, billiardroom bar-room,
and every drinking place or room used a
place of resort, where Intoxicating liquor is
unlawfully sold, furnished given away, OF
kept for selling furnishing or giving away un-
lawfully and every place or room resorted ia
for gambling, shall be held to be common
nuisance, occupied in violation of law" Sub
sequent sections of the statute provide that
when there has b, en- any violation of the law
in any one of the places named in the section
quoted, the court shall adJud.,e such place tC
be a common nuisance, and the SLue shall be
shut up and abatcd by order of the court and
the officer serving sIch order ia d. ected tl
post on the " door main entrance " 20 such q
place a notice that the same is closed and
such place can not thereafter bo opened by the
person convicted until he files a bond that h,
will not again engage in the unlawful traffic
If the parties engaged in lquor-sellng ol
gambling never occupied but one room in $,
doing, there would be little difficulty in fol
lowing the statute and in closing places OF thai
characters but in almost every instance when Z
person is about to engage in liquor-selling, h,
opens what is called a grocery in which h,