The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1908-10-01
DEATH kNtlL OF "SoClAL" CLUBS
Chief Justice Emery's Ruling as to What
Constitutes a Liquor Nuisance.

Chief Justice Emery's Ruling as to What
Constitutes Liquor Nuisance.
B1pDEFoRD, Me-, Sept. %. In connec-
tion with the trial of James Travers on
three liquor cases in the supreme court
at Alfred, Monday, Chief Justice Emery
made sweeping ruling as to wnat'con-
stitutes liquor nuisance, says the blu-
deford Record.
He told the Jury that there seemed to
be some misapprehenslon on tne pupi ;1,',
thare NIGHT be in their own minds. and
he then proceeded to lay down and ex-
plain the law to them.
If was not necessary to prove sale OF
]iouor to maintain a nuisance, ne salo.
The selling Of liquor constitutes null
sance. so did the giving away OF liquor, or
the keeping of liquor, or the keeping OF
Mace resorted to for drinking purposes;
He further instructed that man 1ouno
in charge of place in which liquors were
kent for unlawful purposes was gulity OF
maintaining a nuisance. II ne hao peen
in charge of the place six months, one
month. one week, one day, one hour' OF
even one-half hour he was guilty OF main
| tanning nuisance.
It was probably the broadcast construc-
| ton ever placed upon the law IN ioih
| county court. 4.+;eo ID
In the case on trial the officers testifleo
that when they raided the Eastern Atm
letic club room Travers admitted that ne
was in charge of the place, but demeo
that he had sold any liquor. Under the
definition of the court that was no &c,
Tense. The fact that liquors were touno
and that he was the custodian, even but
for few minutes, was sufficient.
George |. Emery, who defended lrav,
ers did not cut in any testimony, pu'
said that he had some decisions that =, ne
| wished to quote Judge Emery curly
reniied that he did not care to hear any
decisions and insisted that the attorney
| should proceed with his argument TO 'he
jury. .;oo,,+s aoainst
Travers. One was based upon Selzure
at his former place of business on ffan M
| lin street, the other two grew out Vi 'iie
/ Atlantic club raids. 4h W.
] While the first jury was out WIN .ne
i Franklin street case the secoho jury
j heard the evidence in the CLUB room case
J and it was in this connection that .lle
! court laid down the law: The e, hfs' jury
returned a verdict of guilty. me sec 9lll
i iurv returned a similar Verdlct. lne
| third case was called and all was ieauy
for the trial when Travers retfacteu nus
! plea of not guilty and pleaoeo suii'S'
| He was remanded for sentence.
: The Biddeford Record comments on Inc
! case editorially as follows:
! The club room scheme Tor eyaolhg vi.
prohibitory law seems to have o zee, uea II
a death blow by Chief Justice EMERY d
Alfred Monday. .od
The Eastern Athletic club was startec
nnon the advice. practically upon the
+: Guarantee. of good lawyers that by pur-
! s11ino certain methods the club would DC
imn11ne from prosecution under the pro
hihitory law. Not only was this the ad-
+: vice of local attorneys, as 1t is unoer-
stood, but some of the most eminent le-
pal lights in the State were SAID to have
+, taken the same grounds.
{; It was quite a broad scheme. A chaln
| of these clubs was to be organized IN dl1-
, ferent Maine cities, We're organized IN
| fact. and il is said that elsewhere they
are still doing business. 1t was the rate
| of the Eastern Athletic club OF this city
To furnish the test case and that test has
resulted disastrously.
Club rooms have no special rights, &C.
! cording to Judge Emery. Any place
where liquor is kept, for sale or to be
given away, most places resorted to to- Tor
| drinking purposes, is nuisance ana inc
custodian of such place is guilty OF
maintaining a nuisance:
Following out this ruling it would seem
that any Of the many swell club rooms
that flourish in Maine, the bullets main
tanned by fraternal organizations, are
subjected to prosecution as nulsances.
Judge Emery's explanation of the null
sance law does not seem to leave the
| club rooms leg to stand on.
The case of the Eastern Athletic clut
differs from the ordinary rum case II
this respect. The men who embarkec
in the enterprise did SO in good talth.
They made no secret of the scheme
They placed confidence in the advice Of
the lawyers consulted, otherwise they
would have hardly gone into the business
so openly. They honestly believed. thai
they had hit upon safe method OF CIR
cumvent;ng the prohibitory law, but i
seems that they were victims OF pae
legal advice. 49,.
In view of the sweeping ruling O.
Judge Emery in this case the club room
scheme will probably not be given turtle:
trial in this city.