Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1900-11-06
A TEST CASE
Injunction Granted in Dunn ct
ais. vs.. Barry Case
10 Restrain VIM. Barry From Main
tanning a Liquor Nuisance.
Interesting Points Of Law Brought Out in Cas-
in Equity.

'N'NNAf7 "a " :" 80 ''A' tttlititli 10Y an III
junction restraining VIM \. Barry of
NaterNllle. from maintaining liquo,
nuisance and that the place at No. !
Common street Waterville. be adj
judged a nuisance ana that il be abat-
cd and enjoined from being further
used for the Illegal storage or sale of
Intoxicating liquors.
Judge Whitehouse gave his decision
ora lily as follows:
The statute of 1891 provides that the
supreme court shall have Jurisdiction
IL equity. upon information filed BY the
county attorney. or upon petition IL
not less than % legal voters Of such
town or city to restrain
and that IAN injunction for such pur-
pose may be issued by said court vi
any justice thereof.
The statutes authorizing criminal
prosecutions and providing penalties
for thu maintenance Of such nuisanCeS.
had then been in existence in this state
more than 80 years. ana the principles
Of equity jurisdiction in such cases
had been repeatedly announced by this
court. | have an impression that it
was the purpose of the Legislature i'll
enacting the statute OF 1891. expressly
comforting equity Jurisdiction in such
cases. to add something to existing
law. 1t was the intention. | think. 70
ObYidte the objections raised BY de-
PENDANTS counsel as far as practicable
by this legislation. The Legislature
intended to say that the remedies at
f0rded by the penalties Of the criminal
law, and actions at common law Were
not adequate or effective to suppress
or prevent such nuisances. They in
tended to declare that the maintenance
Of liquor nuisance 'imminently
threatened the health. morals and
highest welfare Of the people and that
whenever il had been established by
convictions in the criminal cour; or
judgments at common Law that such q
nuisance existed, there was an imper-
ative necessity that it should be sup
pressed and its continuance prevented.
The new statute accordingly authorizes
this court to make any reasonable or
der, or issue any proper process, nee
essary to abate or prevent such a nui-
Sance. 1t was an auxiliary remedy
supplemental TO the criminal law and
actions at common law.
IN this cause the evidence is plenary
that a liqucr nuisance had been main
tanned by the defendant in the building
described in the petition for more than
4 wear prior to the commencement Of
th-s proceeding He had been twice
convicted Of the offence In the superior
court and paid the penalties then i'm
4 II iC furth her ShOWn
BY uncontroverted evidence that the
defendant has been in continual occu-
patton Of the premises up 70 the pres
ont time. and that large quantities OF
intoxicating liquors We're found on the
premises on the 18th Of May. ana ms
3Gth Of October last
1t is. therefore, the plain duty OF
this court to sustain the petition. nut
as this proceeding is only against the
defendant. as occupant. ana nft
against the owner Of the building. the
iniunctione to be issued can only re
strain the defendant from maintaining
a liquor nuisance in that building. Inc
decree will he drawn accordingly.
The case will come before the law
court. in May. on exceptions.
II and W. ]. knowltOn Of Portland.
,,,, -, ,.5 +o,. the r,pfitiOncrS and War
Ia, :, phi1hrook Of Watervile. for the
dafardant The first and only witness
i, ,,a case vas Rev. Wilbur F. Berry
,,f yCnter,.iIIe. one of the signers of the
n.titiou and State secretary of the
~i,.ir Iaaoua He testified that he
l,rev tha place known as the Park
Cafa IN common street Waterville.
and that it was in charge Of William
\. Barry. He knew that on the -''n
Of January liquor was soid there an''
81 May II last he had sworn on 4 wax
rant. and with the officers mace
search and seizure at the cafe. Ihlrty-
nine bottles of Intoxicating liquors
we're found and over the par WAS d
United States liquor tax ana receipt
Tho only goods in the front Of the place
49,, ,.iaars If being maintained for the
,,.,,osa of selling intoxicants.
SoiT pe'' va, /, did YOU know Of
III. 1inuor being sold?" asked the
nsa, III the petitioners. mir. Berry
d;I nor have any personal knowledge
- ,il.,,o,. ha;ne sold prior to May II, but
,.aaN tbare we're proceedings in law
faa;,s, Parry before that time.
- ,,r,e.crt;o-, offered the record OF
49,, "e , r.D court of the April tern