Windham County reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1901-1906, 1901-12-20
INJUNCTION AND $50, 900 SUITS.
The Weeks Medicine for Brewery and Its
Alleged PrOprietors.

lllt llHupl 'IutNlicIA' uiiNA ~ ii'e ''IAN''
upon the brewery this week. The dose
which has long been preparing after
three trials and Intellectual trips to
Keene was administered with Il
vengance Wednesday, and imme-
diately after another one, in the
shape of SO, 600 suits each un-
der the Vermont civil damage law
against O. II. Ellis, Fred c. Gale and
J. A. Taylor in behalf of the widow
and children of the late Stephen Ellis
who claim that they have positive
proof that he bought at the brewery
the whiskey on which he got drunk
and accidentally shot himself to death
at Mortified October last.
The injunction, which runs against
Ellis, Gale and Taylor and Harrie
Pratt and Frank Faneuf, restraining
them or any of them, by themselves or
employees, from selling any spirituous
or malt liquors on the premises north
of the highway on the island, or using
the premises for such purposes, is is
sued by Judge Young of Exeter and of
the Superior court of Cheshire county,
and the papers were served Wednesday
by Sheriff Tuttle of keene.
1t issues on the prayer of large
number of people in Brattleboro who
organized some time ago with the de-
termination to extirpate the brewery.
Their prayer is that the injunction be
made permanent at the April term of
the Cheshire county court, and until
then this temporary injunction holds.
In the meantime, of course, disobedi-
ence even of the temporary injunction,
means prosecution for contempt OF
court, for which the penalty may be
Imprisonment in the discretion of the
court, without any right OF trial by
jury or even appeal. Whatever may
be thought of this method in land of
law and of jury trials of getting
around the difficulties of prohibition,
the fact remains, as the Reformer has
so often pointed out, that there is law
enough to stamp out the liquor trafhc
if there is really sufficient disposition
to do it. Indeed that would be true
but for that if, without the dangerous
stretch of fundamental principle IN
the injunction process.
But however this may all be, the
Righteousness of the civil damage law,
and of the application to this case, if
the allegations can be proved, is be
vond question. That law rests on
very different principle from prohibl-
tion and is that a man who sells rum
must be responsible for any damage
that the rum does or causes. Section
81, chapter 112, New Hampshire stat
utes says:
Sect. 81 Whenever any person in state of
intoxication shall commit an injury to the
person or property Of another the person who
lawfully sold or furnished any part of the
liquor causing the intoxication, shall he liable
to the party injured for all damages so oc-
casioned to be recovered in a action on the
case, and the person committing the INJURY
may be Joined in the same action. In case of
the death or disability of any person, either
from the injury received as herein speclhed, or
in consequence of intoxicatiOn from the use of
liquor unlawfully furnished, any person VINO
shall be in any manner dependent on such IN
iured person for means of support, or on
whom such injured person may be dependent,
may recover from the person unlawfuly selilng
or furnishing such liquor, all damages or loss
sustained in consequence of the injury, TO be
recovered in an action on the case. Any mar
ricd woman may bring such action in her own
name. and recover such damages to her own
use.
The only possible injustice here is
making the seller of any part of the
liquor that causes the damage, respon-
sible for the whole; but that is no
more risk than the traffic ought TO take.
The suit is brought in behalf of
Louise NJ. Ellis, the widow. and Zella
NJ. and Della b. Ellis, the daughters,
each demanding $4,000 damages Of
each of the defendants for loss
of support, etc. The papers were
served Wednesday afternoon and the
case is returnable at the September
term of Windham county court. The
suit is brought in Vermont, on
the ground that it is under
remedial statute and can be
brought anywhere the defendants can
be found. But Vermont also has
like law, under which defend
ants would be liable # SUIT should be
titfs are c. c. Fits and Waterman "
Martin and +. W. Gibson.
Bacon Il Hooker have been retained
as counsel for Taylor and Gale of the
defense and all three have given bail
for appearance at court. Besides the
question of fact of the sale of the fatal