Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1903-03-27
NO OPEN SALOONS.
BrattIeboro License Commission.
ers Announce Their Decision.
Hotels, One Wholesaler and Two
Holders of Second Class Licenses
viii Conduct the Liquor Business
Of the Town.

of the Town.
There will be no open saloons" in
Brutlchoro.
The liquor business oI tine town will
be conducted by the hotels, by one
wholesale concern and 10y two holders
ul second class licenses VINO Will have
the right To sell all kinds of liquor not
To be drunk on the premises. Probably
the two second class licenses will be
held by drug stores. The other drug
stores probably will hold licenses Of the
ifth class. which will permit the sale
of liquor for medicinal purposes only.
The fee for the first class licenses in
the hotels will be $1,000 each. The law
provides that the fee shall be not less
than $500 nor more than Sl2O0. The law
fixes the fee for a wholesale license at
$1,000 ANA for second class license at
$500
+. W. Putnam. f. H. Howard and j.
j. Ecklcs. the local commissioners, held
their first meeting Friday night. Mr.
Putnam returned to town Friday and he
did not know until then that he had
been appointed on Wednesday. Mr.
Putnam is chairman and secretary of
the board.
The commissioners will not receive the
bond of surety companies from license
holders. The American Fidelity com
panN of Montpelier is furnishing these
bonds. and eN-Judge Ross is out with a
long communication arguing that these
bonds are all right for surety. The
local commissioners believe that the law
makers had no intention of having sure
ty companies furnish the bond. as no
reference to such companies is made in
the law. If person becomes surety
for a license holder he will be sure to
have an interest in the manner in which
the licensee is conducting the business,
Il H.. In,
terest which might be of great import
ancc. would be entirely lacking
The seventh class license allows the
sale of malt liquors. cider and light
wines containing not more than Is per
cent of alcohol not to be drunk on the
premises, with fee of $3.50. In one
town Of the state application is said to
have been made for a license of this
class by "A man who intends to conduct
a wholesale beer bottling establishment.
one prospective applicant i'm Brattleboru
stated that he wished license of this
class. but the commissioners informed
him that il he intended to do whole
sale business in bottling beer it would
he necessary for him to take out first
clae license at $1,000
Several applications for license will he
made within a few days. There has
been some delay in applying as blanks
have not been received from the sec
druggist. has applied for license of the
second class, to sell liquors of any kind
not to be drunk on the premises and
George l.. Greene, druggist. for a IL
cense of the fifth class, to sell for medi
cinal purposes.
Since the above was in type the com
missioners have given out the following
statement for publication.
The Commissioners Statement.
We. the members of the board of Ii
cense commissioners for Bratteboro sub
nit the following decisions of the board
ana the reasons therefor, that pros
pective applicants and the public may be
guided thereby.
]. believing that the highest inter
ests of the town will Ice best conserved
by having no saloon, We decline to en-
terrain or consider any application for
a saloon license.
>. Relieving that the proprietors Of the
drug stores of Bratteboro. having a
good. clean business already established.
will Ice more careful about the sale of
liquors not 10 bc drunk on the premises
than hotel men would or could be.
through their bar-keepers We have de-
cided to issue none but first class licenses
to hotel men in this village.
3. License fee for LIST class license to
be $1,000. With the saloon eliminated.
all liquors to be sold by the glass will
be handled by such hotels as secure IL
I Censes. with competition cut to that
extent we believe that license fee of
$1,000 should be paid.
1. None but personal bonds will be ac
cepted.
We arrive at this decision after care
full investigation of the question. We
do not dispute the fact that in most
cases where surety bonds are required.
the bonds offered by a surety company
are safer than personal bonds, but in this
case, we believe the intent of the law
il to create and maintain a personal in
terest by responsible citizens (such as
would be required as bondsmen) in the
conducting of the liquor traffic by the
licensees. Suppose seven licenses are
granted in this town with two sureties
property owners interested that other
whatever as to whether the conditions
of licenses were lived up to or not. As
personal surety they are bound to watch
out and see that violations do not oc-
cur. or they may have to pay a penalty
This element of personal interest would
not appear in the same measures were
surety company accepted This de-
cision is aside from the fact that there is
certainly a question as to whether a
surety company can legally come up to
the requirement of the law.
Fred w. Putnam.
(Sgned,) Frank II. Howard
John ]. Eckles
Board of license commissioners.