Audubon Republican. [volume] (Audubon, Iowa) 1894-1925, 1908-02-27
, Q0 g
Brewers May. own saloons.

Brewers May Own Saloons.
An impression has gone out that
Attorney General Byers has held that
brewers, as such, cannot own saloons.
His decision respecting the owner
ship to saloons was that corporations
could not own and operate them.
Inasmuch as must breweries are
owned and operated by corporations
the conclusion was natural that the
decision of the attorney general would
stop the practice of breweries owning
and operating saloons. But he did
not specifically hold that breweries
could not own saloons. If an individ-
ual engaged in the brewery business
owned saloon or any number OF sa-
looms, the decision of the attorney
general would not affect him.
AS matter of fact, however, it Is
said, that there are no individuals en-
gagged in the brewery business in
Iowa. All are corporations. And in
the cities they own half of the sa.
looms.
The decision of the attorney gener-
al has raised a storm among the sa-
loon men. They have set the seal OF
their disapproval on It. They declare
that the courts will not sustain 1t.
They anticipate that temperance peo.
pie will undertake prosecutions to
close saloons, on the strength of the
opinion. In such cases opposition is
promised. 1t will be up to the courts,
eventually, to decide the matter.
At Council Bluffs, George III. Mayne
has raised the question as to the
language of the mulct statute. It's
opening section provides that per-
sons cor corporations" engaged in sell
ing intoxicating liquors shall pay a
mulct tax Of $500. 1t is claimed from
this that the law authorizes corpora
lions to engage in the business.
On the contrary, as pointed out at
the Office of the attorney general, the
first section of the law merely relates
to the assessment of the tax against
all places whether owned by individ-
uals or corporations in which liquor
may be sold 1t is for the purpose
of assessing the tax, and does not re-
late to the conditions to justify the
sales. Nowhere. else does the word
corporations occur.
Verdict of $717,o25.
Attorneys have moved in the Potta-
wattamie district court to re-estab-
lish and confirm the biggest judgment
ever rendered in an Iowa court-$717,.
OBS. 1t was entered Nov. /, 1898,
against James F. Burns in favor of
James Doyle.
Since then there have been two and
half trials of the case and it has
been to the supreme court twice. At
the third trial the court stopped pro
ceedings on showing of prejudice in
the conduct of the jury. The matter
was taken to the supreme court then
| on the order granting the new trial,
which was affirmed In its opinion in
| the decision the supreme court used
such language as seemed to the attor-
neys for Burns warrant for them to
ask that there be a change of place
| of trial, and this application was
| made few weeks ago.
Now comes Doyle with motion to re-
new the original default and re-enter
| the judgment. Separate from the mo-
| ton to re-establish the default and
| judgment are the objections and the
resistance to the application for the
change of place of trial. 1t is set forth
| application is made after continu-
ance of the cause upon the application
| of the defendant. 1t is stated further
| that on the last trial Burns was award
| ed verdict by jury in this county.
The motion to reestablish the de-
| fault and judgment is based upon the
| order of Judge Thornell entered at the
! time the agreement was reached that
| the case would be tried in this court
/ providing the judgment for $717,0z5
| should be set aside.
| 1t is supposed that whatever the de-
cision of the lower court the question
will come to the supreme court again.
Revolution in Express Rates.
Complete revolution in. express
rates will be compelled in pursuance
of an opinion sent TO the state rail-
road commission by Attorney General