The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1891-10-13
THE Law OF COCKTAILS
Question as to Whether Unli-
censsd Clubs May Dispense
the Drinks.
The Big Issue to BE Settled In the
Courts OF PhilA-
delphia.
can . Com ination Of Citizens Acquire
RighA which They do not Have
~ I~ndlvidualsf

$5 tkyKVyA w AlsA 4AA0y NU #F@
~ Indlvidualsf
Before tho fall ID over Judge P~ennypacksr
will probably deliver m opinion n sne
aourt Of quarter sessions which will compel
the Union league, Art club, Manufacturers
club and other prominent social orRaniza-
tions 10 take out retail liquor licenses Y
thev wish to furnish beer or win to their
members without being classed ~ speak
easiss, says the philadelphia Record. This
question OF the right Of clubs In this
state to sell liquor to their members is at
last in q fair way to be settled. and II the
opinion Of Judge PennypAcksr AZ already
outlined and the decisions in similar CASES
In adjoining states oan be taken - an in
dication, il will BIO settled adversely in the
clubs.
The question Game mp in the trial Of Pat
rick Tierney, the steward Of the Ellsworth
Climb. a chartered organization at Twenty
third and Kimball streets. It was admitted
that he aold bser 1t five cents . glass and
whisky at 10 cents a glass, but argued IN
defense that it was sold only TO members Of
the club.
nCitizens cannot acquire . greater right
when they combine a. : club than they can
%ncnuire az d combination Of individuals"
said Judge Pennypaoker in his charge TO
the jury.
"Under the act. it is not unlawful to buy,
but it il unlawful to sell. Two men may
agree to purchase = quantity OF liquor ana
divide it; so may a hundred Or any number.
But in this case there was more. Ihere
was not q distribution Of the liquor bought
among the members of the club, put
there was something more. There was q
sale of the property. This is admitted by
the evidence. If you believe this testimony
to be true il is your duty TO mo inc oe1enu-
ant technically guilty.
.It il 4 novel and an important legal
question that arises in this case. 1 snail
grant a motion for a nav trial and shall a.
low the defendant to renew his bail. On
the motion for a new trial the question may
be- considered fully in a. its bearings. II
She defendant has offended against the law
he has offended undsr q question OF right.
There ID 4 difference OF opinion among the
courts of tho various states on this question
of a claim Of right. Tn supreme court Of
ton"
Under this charge the jury rendered 4
verdict of guilty and the defendant re-
newed his bail, The motion for q new trial
will be argued as soon ~ the stenographlc
report has been Transcribed. and II decided
against tho defendant il will be taken to
the supreme court and settled once ana 1of
Assistant District Attorney Boyle stated
that there were two law points involved
that Of selling to the members and that Of
profits. it being claimed that whore there
w.s no profit i wa merely .:a,hs . s~, ~ 1ss1 =
very Broad added Mr.. Boyle. providing
that II shall be unlawful to keep Or main
thin any house, ROOM, or place. hotel. I'M
or tavern. where any vinous. spurious
malt or brewd liquors, or any adml1tnr'
thereof. are sold by retail, except license
tanned. That seems to cover everything
II the decision is adverse to the clubs
don't suppose it will be necessary to TAX
any further action, as they will all prob
ably stop Immediately, and at the mex
succeeding session Of the license oour
The action Of Judge Pennypaoker is il
line with what Lewis d. Vail, the counse
for the Law and Order society, has besl
urging for several years.. Mr.. Vail ma
always commended that the clubs had N
more right to sell liquor without a licens
ing 4 test case out Of the steward OF som
prominent club, not to ssnd men to jail
but merely to decide the point Of law.
"The matter has never come before on
supreme court" said Mr.. Vail. ''but il ha
been decided against the clubs in many Q
the other states. New York, New Jersey
MARYLAND, Kansas and other states have q
strong opinions from their courts OF las
resort. deciding that clubs have no right +
sell liquor without Z license. In New Yor
a test case wal made, and the lower oour
decided against the club. The suprem
court reversed this, but the court OF error
and appeals in turn reversed the snprsm
court. There was a p~erfunotory opinio
in favor of the clubs in Maryland, but ths
has recently been overturned BY a yer
strong opinion against them. The bel
opinion of The lot is, ! think, tho one j
New Jersey. Every part Of the question
carefully gone into and the decision 10 this
liquor cannot be sold either with or with
out profit. The only recent decision j
favor of the olubs was given early. this yes
in Montana in = very superficial opinion
One of the cases referred to there was tn
MARYLAND case which has been reversed b
a subsequent decision in the same state.
''It has been urged that when a club sell
to its members ii is merely selling to itsel1
That il 4 very poor argument, and on tht
basis any member could steal the propsrt
of the club without danger Of prosecution
because he would be merely taking his ow
property. Take the firm Of Strawbridge
Clothier for instance. They buy goods as
firm, but neither Mr.. Strawbridge nor M
Clothier can 60 there and remove whatsve
they want. They must, as individuals, bu
from the firm the same as any other ind
vidual."
The ultimatum of Judge ~Pennypacker b,
created confederation among some Of II
clubs, but no further steps will be take
pending a final decision. The dscision
Judge Pennypacker may be announced
several weeks or q month, bHt the supren
court will scarcely act before the expiratic
of the time allowed to file applications K
licenses. Under the circumstances all II
leading clubs will probably file their appl
cations, and in case tho supreme court d.
cides that no licenses are needed the appl
cations can be allowed to 90 by defaul
The irst year under tho new law sever
clubs. in doubt as to their right to SCI
applied and were granted licenses.