The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1902-04-11
BLAIR MUST DO TIME
Disreputable Joint Keeper Sentenced
to 80 Days Straight.
HE PAID. BUT HAD NO LICENSE
The Prosecuting Attorney shows the
Advantages of Running ON
=, This Plan. 81

2 as + 3 o. -
Peter iBlar proprietor Of the tough
saloon, run in connection with the Park |
theater. at 69and 61a First street s, was
this morning sentenced ITO thirty days in
the workhouse without the alternative of
line for selling liquor without a license
The defense undertook to show that /
Blair was acting in good faith by produce
ing permit bearing the signature Of
both Mayor 5Amess and his; private sec
rotary for the sale of liquor at the saloon
! IN question Judge Holt ruled this docu-
| ment out Of evidence, declaring that 1T /
did not answer the purpose Of license.
He set his seal of disapproval emphati-s 4
cally against the practice Of permitting
breweries to secure licenses for indi 81
viduals to operate saloons and pay their
protectors on the installment plan. 81
| This court, said he, sis forced daily
| to sit here and hear complaints Of law
lessness in saloons Of Just this charac-
ter, run with the deliberate intention Of
evadlng the law, and it appears from all
the facts in the case that this resort IS
| the most disreputablet of them all. L do
not wish to be unnecessarily severe, but
feel that the ends Of justice would be
| defeated If punishment should be lim-
tied to fine" 3
p. F. Waite assistant city attorney,
| declared that Blar had wilfully followed
1 a ''lawless and pernicious custom, - In
tended to permit wholesale violation of
city ordinances regulating the sale of
liquors. If breweries We're to be per-
mitted to act as go-betWeens in the re-
lation Of saloonkeepers to the municipal
government, then the city would be at
the mercy Of such men as Blar.
Studied Evasion of Law.
because this man has been selling
liquor without license" he explained,
sit has been impossible to prosecute him
for other gross violations of city or
| dinanceE. Evidence has not been want,
ing to show that he was selling liquor in
winerooms, run in conf junction with the
saloon, and that he has also been keep.
ing his place open after ~ o'clock at
night. Convictions could have been Sc
cured in neither instance because the or
! dtnance in such cases relates only to reg
ularly licensed saloons. It was to avoid
such prosecution that Blar failed to Sc
cure a license in the regular way, which
would make him easily get-at- able"
j. A. Peterson, who appeared for Blar,
insisted that if his client had violated
the law 1t was through Ignorance of the
exact provisions Of the. ordinance"
Granting that there had beeh such VIOLA
ton, it could only be construed as being
technical. It stood to reason, he said,
that Blar would not have paid $1,000 for
a worthless permit if he could have Sc
cured bona fide license for the same
amount.
I'VE do not concede that he could have
secured liquor license, had he gone at
it in the regular way" was Mr.. Waites
rejoinder.
Judge Holt granted a e-days' stay OF
sentence, and it is presumed that Blar's
case will be Immediately taken before
the pardoning board
fact not brought out in the examina-
tion was that the law not only requires
"a CT na vY0p on for OF +hn
city hall, but also insists that such
license shall be posted in prominent
place in the saloon.
Blar admitted on the stand that it had
been his custom to "pay the brewery
for several years He said he had paid
more than $4,000 to the city in that way
since embarking in the liquor business.
The complainant was Holger Lilquist,
who was recently, robbed of $lO9 in Blar's
saloon.