Audubon Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Iowa) 1894-1925, 1907-08-15
New Point in saloon Suits.

New Point in Saloon Suits.
Des Moines.--A novel and curious
law point is involved in the certiorari
proceedings in connection with the
Dubuque saloon cases, and will take
the attention of the entire supreme
court.
Injunction cases were brought
against 125 Dubuque saloons, and an
agreed decree was entered by Judge
Robert Benson. J. e. Edwards OF
Dubuque seeks to have the action OF
Judge Benson reviewed by the SUI
preme court, and applied for the
writ of certiorari.
1t is the rule that none but the
original parties to an action may APP
pear in certiorari proceedings. In the
Dubuque case John j. Keane and the
saloon keepers were the only parties
to the injunction suits. Neither is
making the application for the writ
on Judge Benson, under which his
decree in their case would be reviewed
by the supreme court.
This, then Is the new and curious
question: Was the proceeding of a
character on behalf of the whole pub
lie. which entities other citizens than
Bishop Keane and the saloon men to
ask the supreme court to review the
action of the trial court?
This question will have to be dispos.
ed of by the supreme court at its
September sitting before the Du'
buque saloon cases are opened up,
Judge Bishop, before whom the appli
cation was made, passed 1t over to
ha fIIlI ,rfh o. NJ
important character.
Former. Attorney General A. J.
Baker appeared for Mr.. Edwards
claiming that any citizen has right
In these cases, which were brought
ION behalf of the citizens" to apply
for the writ reviewing the action
of the district court. The saloon
men will resist the writ on the ground
that no one can apply for it except
parties to the original action. The de.
cree having been agreed upon by the
attorneys for the plaintiff, John j.
Keane, and the attorneys for the sa
loon keepers, both parties are estop
ped from making the application for
review. Unless, therefore, the Ed
wards-Baker appearance can be main
tanned, the Dubuque incident is closed
so far as the 1875 suits alluded to are
concerned.
While the Dubuque cases were
brought In the name of John j
Keane, they actually were prosecuted
by John I. Houser, attorney for the
Iowa Anti-Saloon league, and r. F.
Drewry. Lyon & Lyon were the at
torneys for the saloon keepers. The
suits were brought May of this
year, and Judge Benson entered de
cree July l.
Complaint of this decree is made
by Mr.. Edwards in the effort to re
open the cases by certiorar.
The supreme court has held that a
saloon keeper or druggist who sells
Intoxicating liquor must know whether
he is selling to minor or to a
drunkard, two classes of people tc
whom it is forbidden to sell liquor
ignorance of the fact is not de
Tense against prosecution, under the
law, as construed by the supreme
court The decree of Judge Benson
however, is claimed by Messrs. Ed
wards and Baker to enjoin the saloon
keepers from selling liquor to minors
and drunkards when they are known
by the seller to belong to those
classes.
The law provides for but one en-.
trance and exit to saloons. Under the
Benson decree it is claimed that the
Dubuque saloons are enjoined from
allowing patrons to use all but one
entrance.
The saloons are enjoined from being
open on election days and Christmas,
but other holidays are not included in
the injunction, it is alleged
1t is the custom of district judges,
it is said, to enter DEGREES on which
litigants agree, without special inspec-
ton of them.