Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1905-10-25
mdpe Howell Justly Criticises Dis
graceful Manner of Handling
Liquor License Business.
DAMAGE SUIT IS DISMISSED.
IN TecbnlcaIltles Due 10 the Careless.
sess Of City Council and City
Recorder

ogden, oct 2j.--ln rendering his opln-
,or Yesterday in granting a motion to
rou.sllt In the case Of Bertha NJ. Peter
son ys. IL. McMartm ct al. the city
council and the city recorder Of Ogden
were taken severely TO task for the
loosc and unbusiness like methods Of
granting liquor licenses to irresponsible
uurtIes The action was a meritorious
One but was non-suited ON technical
grounds. Mrs. Peterson sued the sellers
of mloxICants for damages for Injuries
sustained by her husband when he was
under the influence of liquor purchased
from the defendants From the eyi-
dca,c submitted and the decision Of the
court 10 is learned that the saloon In
question was being operated under
license granted for another place en-
WgN In Diminishing the suit the court
said IN part
THESE inaccuracies, FIRST that ihG
application was IN behalf of individuals,
while the bond given was in behalf Of
a partnership, and secondly that the
minute entry leaves of the Nc Of the
word McMartin, and thus renders II
doubtful whether the minute entry is
applicable 10 the petition on which the
license Is supposed 10 be based while
they show d sloyenly method Of con-
ducung tho City's business, still they
sink into insignihcancc in comparison
with what followed fol II Is admitted
hy all the parties In this action that
upon the mere verbal request Of one OF
the suretes on the bond which was Civ
on and without any now bond being
demanded or given the license was is
sued To McMartin & Ingebretsen to carr
~ on . retail liquor business at 2ilba
Washington avenue, instead Of 35i
Twcnty-fourth street.
Assuming that the plaintiff In this
action has meritorious action against
these defendants in compliance with
The statute. the negligence of the city
officers Of ogden city, In one case the
city council and I'm the other the city
recorder, I'm falling to comply with the
main requirements Of the law In rela-
ton 10 granting licenses 10 the defend
ants has absolutely deprived her Of
that action. Such aflagrant disregad
nj The law on the part Of public officers
when brought 10 the court cannot he
TOO strongly condemned, for the court
has q right TO demand that the city
officers of ogden city I'm granting u
tcnscs comply with the law In order
not only that they protect the interests
VI the city. but also Of these married
women and their children, In whose be.
half these actions have been allowed
by the Legislature in order that they
might not suffer because OF the busl-
ness in which the defendants have
been engaged by the selling to the
husband of liduor by which he becomes
intoxicated and is injured or killed, by
reason Of being in that state of intoNi
cation. Jnd women and children be mus
deprived OF the support TO which they
are entitled.
" have said sn much upon the gem
oral subject because of the negligent
net 10 say disgrlceful. maner I'm when
this business Of granting licenses by
Ogden city has been brought to the
attention of the court In this case, and
now proceed 10 consider the queS-
tion as to what IS the validity of the
claim made on the part OF counsel Tor
the defendant, that although by reason
NJ the bonds not covering the places
nj business AT which the liquor Is al
legged TO have been sold, the sureties
on the bonds are necessarily released
from any liability upon the bonds
ut viii be seen that although the
provisions of the statute are perfectly
plain and euCh and every one OF them
mandatory, not only was one OF the IL
ceusas involved In this case but both
licenses involved were granted by the
city without any bonds TO cover the
conducting Of such business at the
place lt which 1t was conducted, ana in
utter disregard of the plain require
mruls VI the statute without any pro-
lection 10 the city or TO the public
1T is impossible simply by reason of
the fact that the city officer whose
duty n is TO- See that the provisions of
tha law are complied with failed I'm that
regard. TO thereby hold that the de-
fcudants are cstopped from relying up
on the defects in these bonds, and the
conclusion IS irresistible that there rs
no implied liability on their part to be
governed by the bonds which were
given to cover the totally diherEt
rl.npa of buetneEe -