Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1892-09-07
A TEST LIQUOR CASE.
Max Schneider Acquitted of Selling
Drinks to Minors.
BE HAD USED PROPER CAUTION.
Offenders Plead Guilty and Receive Work.
house Sentences
THE NEWS OF THE COUNTY COURTS

The most interesting case of alleged vio-
lation Of the Brooks law to be tried this
term is that of Max Schneider, charged
with selling liquor to minors, taken up in
Judge Kennedy's court yesterday. The de-
fendant was proprietor of the Hotel Fed
eral, of Allegheny, until July last, when
he sold out He was also President of the
Allegheny Liquor League. Not only this,
but he was a member of the Legislature
from his district at the time of the passage
of the Brooks law, and took an active part
in the attempt to shape legislation on the
liquor question. 1t is alleged by his
friends that on this account certain
persons have been opposed to HIM.
just before the last License Court the
accusation of selling to minors was made
against him, and by reason of that he was
refused by the court and was compelled to
dispose of his property. John Irwin, con-
stable of the Second ward, Allegheny, was
afterwards compelled to make the return
to court The case was called yester-
day and Mr.. Schneider was { de-
Tended by Attorneys Young & Trent
Charged With Selling Beer to Boys.
1t was alleged that Stewart Knot, Will
son, Floody, Coyle and others under 81
years of age had obtained liquors at the
Federal House. Louis Brand and Joseph
Fisher, bartenders,' testified that the boys
who got liquor there were at first refused
but they aiterward brought men along who
corroborated their assertions that they
were of age, and witnesses were
then called as to the character of
the house. Recorder Won Bonnhorst
James Hunter, lime merchant; George w.
Snaman, carpet dealer; Robert Pitcairn,
merchant tailor; Charles Reisenstein, china
merchant; A. Loeb, jeweler: Massin Elton,
printer; Mr.. Strausberger, clothing dealer;
George Lacock, James Mcintosh and VIM.
Griffith certified to the good character of
the house and the standing of defendant
The case was submitted without argument
Judge Kennedy delivered an opinion
which is of great Importance to liquor
dealers. He said substantially that if the
liquor seller, after having made proper in
quiries in a case where there is doubt as to
the party purchasing being of age, and after
having honestly endeavored to find out the
truth is imposed upon, the intent to violate
the law is wanting and the jury should
lcquit.
MUST lake oruinarv HrecautlOns.
On the other hand, if the proprietor neg
lected to take proper precautions or failed
to instruct those III charge of the bar as to
their duties he should be held responsible; in
other words a proprietor of a hotel could
not let his barkeeper do as he pleased and
then free himself from responsibility. He
must not neglect to look after and superin-
tend that part of his affairs, for when
party goes into that dangerous business it is
a part of the responsibility, that he sees
that his employees comply strictly with the
law.
If in this case the boys showed by their
appearance that they were of age and so as
serted. the employer was satisfied in assum-
ing IL. But that was a matter of fact Tor
the jury TO decide. The Judge also in
structed that the costs could not be placed
on the prosecutor in case of an acqaittal,
Tor, being public officer, it was his duty
to make the return. The costs, he said,
must be placed either on the county or de-
tendant.
The jury acquitted and placed the costs
pn the county.