The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-04-30
LIQUOR IN ALASKA.


Many Dealers 1ndIcfe1-MODey RAISED
for Their Defense
The liquor law Is causing al much srou-
be n Alaska As in any other part Of the
United States by the law the sale and
manufacture Of spir1taous liquors in Alas
Ia Is totally prohibited, yet IT is sold and
sTad~. toe. s-o-cafied " issy especially, and
there Is strong feeling against the Ell
forcemesst OF the law. But the matter has
been brought 10 a test and nearly every
knowE liquor seller in Juneau. Stka.
Douglas and Wrangei have been Indicted.
Here are their names.
Andrew Hansen. James VIM. o. u. Ash
by. Charles Wells. Frank Kane. r. NJ. Ber-
~. William Mulcahy. James Mackison- L.
Kubaeh. J. ID. Mckay. Sam kohn. r. Nc
Donald. John Caldwell. John Peterson,
Harry Rashntr, George kyrage, j. ID. Nc
Dcssgai. Mayo & Schefrer. Harry Ash. w.
Williams. Hank Osborn. Pat Lynch.
Archie Mcclellan. Robert Bwch. Hugh
Macarthur. Oscar Gilman, Antoine Liii-
strand. F. A. Wes1. Antoine Marks. John
Gray. John Carlson. Jennie Higgins. John
Parelii. Henry korkOran. Otto Nelson. E.
p. Lynch. Dan Sanders. J. d. Jourden.
Oscar 4shley. George Miller. George Rice,
Louis La Ponse. Mrs. Uler. Frank voiker.
Paul Bohm. Thomas Mooney. Oscar Swan
son. George AlIard. Sam Sing. Juan Florn.
Josty IA chinaman). Michael MCGEE. A. b.
RonzoDe.
A bench warrant was issued for Macl<i-
son. He was Immediately brought before
Judge Delaney. Mackisofr at once pleaded
guilty and was sentenced to pay fine of
$50. Judge Delaney in passing sentence
said
Il believe 1t to be the intention Of con-
gross TO prohibat the sale and manufacture
Of spirituous liquors within the territory of
Alaska. The grand jury has presented an
indictment against the defendant and he
fas pleaded guilty. II therefore becomes
my duty to impose q fine. In doing SO /
have no intention Of making an example Of
ans- one. I realize that pubic opinion Is
against the enforcement OF the law: but.
notwithstanding that. have q duty to per-
form. and long as the law Is upon the
statute book and indictments are present
ed IL Is my duty to enforce IL. 1t would be
better for those engaged In the liquor bust
ness to have the law tested. as their money
Is Invested liz property and they should
know Just what their rights are. II Is also
better for the puhic. as well as the court,
To know whether the law will stand the
test or not. and for the purpose of having
the iaw tested I have concluded 20 infiict
the highest penalty allowed by law. There
fore. the Judgment OF this court Is that
you pay a fine Of $500. and you will be al
lowed few days to consult an attorney
and Determine what course you viii pur-
sue In the matter"
That the saloonkeepcrs are determined
10 make bitter fight against what they
consider 20 be an encroachment upon Their
rights IL openly manifest from the stand
they have taken Scarcely had the in1ict-
nsents been returned before a petition was
In circulation among the liquor sellers re
questing contributions for the purpose of
defraying the necessary expenses inctden-
tai 20 fighting the validity Of them. A fund
ranging In the neighborhood OF $500 is
said to have been raised. OF this amount
$50 is TO be paid over TO the attorneys for
the defense In advance. and the remaining
$500 TO be turned over 10 them in the event
OF their successfully defending the case.
The first case tried since then has been
that of James VIM, In which the jury re-
turned a verdict OF not guilty. This would
seem to promise well for the defense. but
the point upon which this defendant man.
aged to escape Is not stated. The next case
wiz come before new jury and perhaps
present different features