Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1905-03-18

| RistS are not rumsellcrs; | submit that
| there are reputable men among them
| Ana we can have confidence in them to
believe that they will not abuse the priv
| leEe. In Bangor. for instance. a drug
| sist ls not allowed today to keep any
| iiqnor for the purpose OF compromising a
| physicians prescription.
| Mr.. MERRILL of SkOwhegan I would
Xix" 10 ask if the gentleman claims that
a druggist cannot use alcoholic liquors
In compOunding medicines?
| Mr.. O'BRlEN: I did not make any
such claim. l claimed that under the
| present law he cannot keep liquor with
ont the great risk Of being brought into
| court. and the mere fact of his having
| mis- United States license for having
| liquor for the purpose of compromising
medicines makes him prima facie rum
seller in the eyes Of the law of the Stat"
| OF Maine: and my brother from Skowhc
| gan knows that as well as | do because
| he mas defended some rumsellers.
| Mr.. MERRILL: Can you state that
| from your own knowledge?
Mr.. O'ERli:N: / Supposed so, as n
brother attorney. Now, | submit that
with the enforcement such as we expec!
10 nave AID undoubtedly will have under
the numerous provisions of the prohibit
| tory law. that there Should he some
| legitimate way for Il person in n case Of
| real sickness to he able TO procure the
| necessary Ingredients TO fiji n prescription
of their physician. For that reason alone
| | signed the minority report; and | move
| mat the minority report lie substituted
for the majority, and when the vote is
| taken ! move that ii be taken by the yeas
and nays.
| Mr.. MERRILL of Skowhesan: Mr.
| Speaker. This is 4 bill calculated under
| the glise of a druggists bill. not only IN
provide place for obtaining in; oxican:s
| bun il is bill which in its results in my
| Judgment would produce a state OF af-
fairs in this State more to be lamehted
| more 10 he feared Than though We passed
IN az; resubmitting the constitutional
| an, ndrnert or authorized any and every
| man in the State Of Maine to sell liquor
| 1T liberty. ! do not wart anyone to
| hink that ! propose to charge the drug
| gists of the State of Maine with being
| les,rous of becoming rumsel'ers; but
| among the druggists of this State YOU
will find u great many who. under the law
rs it is proposed here by this bill would
become nothing more and nothing less
| than rumsellers. | have been in pas,
years in different states where they have
had practically this druggist bill. What
mas been the result of it? 1t has practi-
fally made rum shops of the drug stores
! was in North Carolina for several wears
1t different seasons of the year and
| stopped at hotel in a little city where
| the druggists Were allowed to sell liquor
on a Dhy .sician's prescription. That ho:el
| keeper built nOtel with a veranda ten
| teet wide and extended it out beyond his
building about twenty feet and behind
| that veranda he built a drug store. He
mad room tel by twenty feet in front
with patent medicines and drugs on the
| shelves, and he had a room in the rear
about forty by twenty feet filed with all
| KINDS of liquors. and this landlord hired
Il regular practising physician and a
pharmacist tC take charge of that end OF
the hotel. The result was that under the
color of the law he opened a regular
wholesale and retail liquor business
Without retie citing upon the druggists at
all, it seems to me il YOU pass this bill
you will find that the hotel Keepers
those that have shown a disposition to
sell in the paSt,-will nave n drug store
the next door to their hotels; and l be-
iIeve there would be more danger flowing
from the enactment of this bill than from
Gny possible bill almost That will be en-
enacted at this session
In. l,.,, l>x.r~
State about 80 years and | have failed
yet to learn of one druggist being fined
for selling liquors in the compromising OF
his medicines; and while the United
States license is prima facie evi!enc, of
the tact that druggist is doing an ile
Sitimate business. the minute that drug
siSt should be indicted upon that license
he can go into court and say that he is
not III the business, and then the burden
Is on the State to prove that ne is doing
an illegitiEiate business
Mr.. O'BRIIN: would like to ask The
gentleman whether it is admissible In
court for Il man. even though he is IN
the drug business. when liquor has been
found in his place and he has Il United
States license if the evidence WOULD be
admitted in court that Ne kept that liquor
simply for medicinal purposes?
Mr.. MERRILL: Certainly.
MIR: O'BRlEN: Do You think it was ad-
missihle in the case of certain druggists
| in this Stat" who have been tried under
| that evidence:
AIR. MERRILL: don't sec any reason
why not. | don't know what case you re-
| fer to. Reputable druggists need not fen
from the courts any punishment when
| they use liquors in compromising their
| medicines. / have never known of such
| Il case unless the druggist had violated
the spirit of the law. and had be come Il
common seller under the law.
After we have passed the Sturgis bill
| | ask you If you are going back on that
record and are going to undo all and
| more than all that you have already done
for the prohibitory law. The gentleman
| has referred to Bangor. Are We going
to lcssate to furnish Bangor with places
| in which to buy their liuIor" If Bangor
wants 4 liquor agency they can have 1t.
| They have had one until quite
| recently. but they have seen fit
| to do away with it. If the peo-
pie of Bangor themselves don't
| want any place to buy liquors for medic
inal purposes. is it our duty to provide
| them with 80 places when they don't
| want one? They have said they don't by
| abolishing their city agency. If it is such
| IA necessity for the welfare OF the State
| that there be those places. the law al
| ready provides the means whereby they
can have those places in every town and
| city in the State. Word has come to me
| directly that in my town Il man who has
| been in the liquor business there up to
within two wears VIXEN this druggist bill