The Birmingham age-herald., 1909-07-02
DECISION CAUSES MUCH DISCUSSION Locker Club Question Occupies Center ot Forum RIGHT TO STORE LIQUOR Two Vital Questions Decided By Judge sayre in Lengthy Opinion
 Which Is Given
 In Full.
BY HERvEY w. LAIRD.

Montgomery, July 1.-(Special) )-The decision of the supreme court with re- gard to the right to keep liquors in storage is the talk of the city and of the state, in view of the fact that it is thought that as a result the state cannot control lockers or keep down the distribution of liquors in clubs, if those clubs be owned and conducted by persons who can establish ownership of the drinks that may be served in them. This may be so, but there are many who still believe that the lock CT question can be met and handled if approached in the right way.
 To begin with it is well to get a right view of the case at Issue. First the city of Bessemer undertook to pro- hibit storing liquors anywhere, and this was declared illegal in an opinion by Mr. Justice AIayaeld. Then an ordi- nance was passed to prevent storage where drinks of any kind were sold this being the provision annulled in the Bidge case just handed down by MT. Justice sayre. So it is that every ef- fort of Bessemer to keep owners of liquors from storing and oarding it has failed, and, in line with the two decisions will likely fail in future.
 Two Questions.
 There are two questions decided by Justice Sayre, 1. e., that liquor is property, not contraband, and can be owned and held in such quantity as any other property, when it is legally acquired. It may be used and en- joyed the same as any other property so long as it is not disposed of in vio- lation of the laws. In the second place it is entitled to all the protection and rights that accrue to other holdings, not becoming subject to removal or destruction save as would be the case with other property under emergency conditions. Thus 1t Is entrenehed as having all the protection that the law throws about legal holdings.
 But liquors cannot be stored or held or hoarded and under the protection thus accorded be used to violate the prohibition laws. In other words, the running of club as a subterfuge to get around the liquor laws would be subject to the provisions of the pro hibition laws, the facts to be for the jury to decide. It Is also a fact that the state may require all clubs of what soever kind to be licensed, and hay VI done, refuse to license any club, save the promise that 1t will not sell liquors or allow them to be sold on the premises.
 Judges and good lawyers believe that the two decisions are notable, in that they clear the atmosphere, but do not agree that they make 1t impossible to pass an act that will prevent the sale and disposal of liquors in clubs. True the effort to convict will be all the more strenuous, but this even can be done when 1t is remembered that the jury will have the right to say what is subterfuge and what is an endeavor to evade the statute by this kind of a move. In a word, the prohibition law has been declared good and the court is going to be very careful to steer clear of any course that will in the end rem der it ineffective by evasion or by sub terfuge
 The full text of the decision of the su- preme court in the locker club cases read by Justice Sayre and concurred in by Justices Dowdell. Anderson and Mayheld, Justices Mcclellan and Denson dissent ing, Is as follows:
 The proceeding against the appellant was had under the ordinance of the city of Bessemer, which will appear in the reporters statement of the case. It is at this day universally held that the pro- hibition by the state of the manufacture and sale of intoxicating liquors and bev- erages within its territory is a constltu- tional exercise of police power. The null tiplication in recent years of statutes and court decisions relating to the subject indicates general and growing deter imitation to make prohibition effective &C., cording to the popular intent MT. Black.