Daily Kennebec journal., 1901-12-12
| SELLER LIABLE.
Law Court So DEGREES in Case
of Death of Drinker.
Woman Sues Alleged SaIoon-keeper
'or causing Death Of Husband.
ANU Inc highest Tribunal in the State Saws
Action Is Maintainable.


w H'a'e. was made Wednesday. re
iating 10 the sale of intoyica,;ns. I..,,e
ana oy That sale causing the daath =
'o,i' "epriFing his wife of his SUP
( ,'' was an action brought b
! nun " imam Il. Pattangall. a Banpo
i'"He'' formerly of Machias, in bahaI
oi Mhhel ID. Gardner against Arlireto,
DAY. Ihe action was to recover dan,
ages 1or an injury to the pIain,is,
means OF support ny reason of the sell
ing TO he.' husband of intoxicotir.
hquof, which caused his death. tn.
case was never tried. but by agreenan,
Oh the interested parties. went 10 IN.
law court to see ii the action coula IA,
maintained. me court said yes" Tn.
iolloWlng Is the opinion in full. draw,
by chief Justice Wiswell and SAM
tonc6 by the other justices:
lhis action comes to the law court
"l'oh report Of the pleadings. il
"hich the parties submit the question
as 10 whether Or not the facts set out
IN the plaintiffs declaration CONSTITUTES
a cause for action.
me action is to recover damages
under the Revised Statutes. Chapte~
~ Section AZ, for injury to the plain-
mrs means 0f support by reason cf
me mt"Vication Of her husband. result
ing IN ms death, caused by the defend
amt py giving or selling to him intoxi-
'atlnS liquors The statute referred to.
Sc lar a. involved in the decision of
the case. is as follows: Every wife.
enid. parent. guardian, husband. or
other person who is injured in uerson.
property, means Of support, or other
wise. by amy Intoxicated person. or ~
le@Son of the intoXication of any per-
sen, has d right Of action III his own
name against any one VINO bv selling
or giving any intoxicating liuuor. or.
otherwise, has caused or contributed 10
The intoNication OF such person"
Ike plaintiff alleges in her declara-
tion that. March is. 1900. sh, was. and
fer long time prior thereto had been.
tie wife of one Horace r. Gardner.
that he was her sole means Of support.
ami that from the time of their mar
riage VI 10 that date he had supported
Ter: that upon that day the defendant
III It place named gave or sold to her
husband certain quantity of intoxi-
"a ting liquors. thai the husband tdrank
this quantity of Intoxicating liquor
gwen or sold to him by the defendant
and that thereby he became intoxi-
Gated, and that because Of such intox!-
cation ana because Of having drank
this liquor he died, March 10. 1900. by
reason thereof the plaintiff was de
priNed of her only means OF support.
The question presented is whether II
not the plaintiffs means Of support
were injured, within the meaning Of
this statute, by her husbands death
resulting from his intoXicati caused
by liquor sold or given him by the de-
fendant. the husband having always
supported the wife during their mar
ried life and having been her sole
means Of support.
This question has never been decided
in this State. 50 that it becomes our
duty to construc the statute and to
ascertain its true intent and meaning
il this respect. While such a stHtute
which gives remedy unknown to the
common law. should not be enlarged
IL should of course be SO construed.
where the language IS clear and eX-
plicit, as to give it its true meaning,
having in view the purpose q N"
statute.
II is evident that the statute n5t oniy
gives a remedy when one is injured IN
his person, or property, by an lntoNi-
Gated person. but also when person
Is Injured III his or her means OF sup
Dort by reason of the intoxication OF
any person." The most obvious ana
common injury Of this l"tter charac-
ter is where a wife or child Is depend
cnt upon the husband or fatner lor
suDport, and by res son OF the lntoNlSa-
ton Of the husband or father ne IS rem
dercd wholly or partially incapable 70
furnish such support. II IS unques-
toned that in such case an acton VIII
liz. If the total or partial incapaclty -
provide support is only temporary "
even if il is lasting, caused by soinc
,.a,,nanent disability sustained Wtllt III
. stata of intoxication, so long as TN
hrshand continues to live; but it IS
,iai,,ad that this injury 10 the wife
,,,.a,s If support does not continue
f+ar the death of the husband. IN
attar words. the contention is. and Ii
;s sunnorted by number of decisions
! Ii, courts OF NlSH dutIi'iit' N'
e-,rtiallv similar statutes, thal WHll'
=, ,,.ife's means Of support may be IN
| ;,,ed within the meaning OF tne stat
g,,a by reason of the temporary or PEI
u,a,ent disability of the husband pS
,.-oso, of his intoxica ton. ana conse-
4 ruent incapacity. or diminished capac-
~. ia provide support. she cannot be
inirred in this respect by his death foi-
,n,,inp and resulting from his lntoXlc2-
ticn.
,ya cannot agree to this proposition
v-a are unable to perceive any lega
1i>tfr,tiou. except in degree. hetWeel
no temporary injury to Wife.s means
nf suDport By reason OF some acciuei'
s,,..ained while intoxicated. and 'h'
,a,n,arent injury suffered by her o.
,ha same nature by reason ot MS lhtoA'
;n,tion. In either case the INJURY Il
:, har means Of support by req son "I
rie intoxication. "OtherWise' MINOR am an
temporary injuries 10 the Pi5ih'i.
',.a,e of support would be within th'
,,rotaction of the statutes. while th'
.,,satest and most permanent INJURY =
81, would b, without remedy SP
,n,arican ana English Encyclopedia o
Taw. second edition 81 ana cases clteu
or course a wife cannot recover un