The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1892-10-07
Violation of Liquor Laws.

,be case Of the Commonwealth
ne, I. ). Mann, charged with sell
% hs,i to minors, tried in court last
! Thursday, Judge lkeler charged
Jury as follows;
c,yrtEMEN OF TaE jury The
F,ndaut, John S. Mann, stands be-
' you charged in this indictment
Having, on the twenty-thl-d day
January last, sold intoxicating
uors to minors-persons under
,nty one years Of age.
Under the act Of 1887, the penalty
,utb violation Of law is fine of
less than one hundred dollars and,
,be discretion of the court, revoca.
M Of license. The court may re.
ke the license, or may not /; but the
els imperative.
The court and the jury are here
,dsr their oath to see that the laws
observed, the proper penalty
violation Of any law is enforced.
The defendants license to retail in
I,icatnp liquors was obtained by
m from this court by compliance on
part with the law Of the common
,,l,h under which such license is
tan,ed he paid for it, it is a part of
property and he is entitled to hold
unless he has forfeited his right by
cu.obseryance Of the law under
hch he obtained it.
|, appears in the case, without any
,pute, that the defendant did sell to
least three OF the persons named in
bis Indictment two Of them shown to
ave been at the time, and to be now,
ninors) beer, on the day laid in the
hdictment.
In cases Of this kind, the law re-
eunes that the charge be made speci-
Ecaly-that the days and times should
e set forth in the indictment. that
be names of the persons to whom the
kIeged sales were made should be
Mentioned, if known to the inquest,
,nd that the proof should be confined
10 the allegation as made in the bill
bund.
II it were alleged in this indictment
hat the defendant had sold sat divers
other times before and afterwards"
then the defendant would have been
entitled to a bill of particulars, and, if
hat had been duly furnished him by
he commonwealth, proof might have
been made in accordance with such
|bll.
However, it is scarcely necessary in
this case to comment upon these mat
lers as they are not here involved.
The supreme court of this com
nonwealth, in reviewing the decisions
ofthe lower courts, has gone very far
We think to place strict and harsh
construction upon this act Of 1887,
against the hotel keeper. We viii
give you the language of the supreme
court:
at appeared in the evidence thai
The respondent had sold beer to two
minors. 'rhe respondent was sworr
and admitted in his testimony that he
bad sold beer to the two minors men
toned. His excuse was that their ap
pearance indicated that they were o.
full age, and as a precaution before
selling, he asked their age that he
bad sold to them in good faith, fully
believing them to be of full age. Con
eeding all this the supreme court say
IT'S no excuse or justification"
This was a case in which there ha(
been granted a rule to show cause
Why license should not be revoked
On account Of sales to minors it wa
Evoked by the court below, and tina
actlon was sustained by the supreme
court. We are bound by that decision
se must follow it, and We shall do Sc
faithfully; but we think that it is ;
very harsh construction of the statute
70 say that one who knows the law
desires to obey it and strives to obey
J, diligently and honestly endeavors t
comply with all its provisions, shoul'
uom an unwi.ting transgression los'
ais a property or his liberty; yet such /
me ~ result, as the law is construed b,
me M supreme court Of our state
hence it becomes the duty of tn
courts 8, to hold the prosecutor YER
|, closely to the rules Of evidence, and Il
oe strict in the requirement of goo'
'a',h upon the part of the prosecutor.
II seems to us that there ought t
|Ue legislation upon this subject II
rne Buckalew act of 1856 or 1851.
I've 40 not recollect the exact date
Tas SO provided that a person coul'
Eot be convicted unless it was show
mat he aciti4lly furnished the liquor
ne words knosoingly and aoiltuN
Eere IN that act of assembly, an'
aey ought never to have been dropped
can be readily ascertained whethe
acensee does sell "knowingly an
hiaIly,' or not. If the present de
Inaand had sold to persons in tn