The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1909-11-11
REVOKE DRUGGIST 'L|CENSE'
7. M. Barrett, One Of the Three Rut-
land Pharmacists Who We're Con-
victed of Selling Liquor, Loses His
Certificate.

vlcted of Selling Liquor, Loses His
Certificate.
The three Rutland druggists, M. s..
Bayliss, T. M. Barrett and l.. A. Min
er, who recently pleaded guilty to in
dictments in Rutland County Court,
charging them with having violated
the conditions of their fifth class Ii
quor licenses, in that they sold intox-
icating liquors to persons who were
not provided with prescriptions fur
nished by physicians, appeared be-
fore the State Board of Pharmacy in
the Supreme Court room Tuesday
morning to show cause why their
certificates emitting them to prac-
tice pharmacy should not be revok-
ed. The respondents were not repre-
sented by counsel and the proceed
ings were brief, but after the hearing
of the facts it was decided to revoke
the license of Mr.. Barrett and place
the other two druggists on probation,
pending their good behavior in this
respect
]. G. Bellrose, of Burlington, pres
ident of the Board, opened the hear
ing by calling the druggists atten-
ton to section $500, of the Vermont
Statutes, in which it is set forth that
the certificate of a druggist found
guilty of violating the liquor laws
shall be forfeited.
Mr. Bellrose then called upon Mr..
Miner for a statement of his side of
the case, in the course of which Mr..
Miner said that he had been engaged
in the drug business for about 10
years, having been registered under
what he termed "the old law" He
said that about three weeks previous
to the finding of the indictment
against him, a young man who was
afterward arrested for stealing
knives, called at his store and asked
for three bottles of beer, saying that
his wife was sick and needed them as
stimulant.
The young man happened to be a
neighbor of Mr.. Miner and the drug
gist was acquainted with the condi-
ton of the young mans wife, 1t was
too late, Mr.. Miner said, to secure a
prescription and he let him have the
beer. Later Mr. Miner alleged
when the young man was arrested
for stealing, he was under the infiu-
ence of liquor and the druggist said
he was given to understand that this
same young man swore on him under
pressure. Mr.. Miner said that this
was the first time that he had ever
been accused of violating the liquor
law.
When Mr.. Barrett was called upon
he said that he had been engaged in
the drug business in Rutland for
more than dozen years and was reg
istered under the old law. Mr.. Barrett
said that he was convicted about ten
years ago, under the prohibition law
of selling liquor illegally. He said that
of selling liquor illegally. He said that
he pleaded guilty to the three indict-
ments found against him on the ad-
vice of his lawyer to avoid expensive
litigation. He said that he was fined
800 and costs and that had he
known that he was going to be soak
ed" the amount stated, he certainly
| would have fought the case. The
other two druggists said something
to the same effect.
In reply to question, Mr. Barrett
said that it was not true that he had
been systematically engaged in SELL
ing liquor illegally during his entire
business career.
Mr.. Bayliss said that he has been a
registered pharmacist in this State
since 1893 and that this was the first
time under the present law that he
had been accused of selling liquor il
legally. He said that he worked in a
drug store in Manchester about Ia
or 10 years ago, under the prohibi-
tion,law and at that time was convicted
of having sold liquor illegally. AT
that time, he said, he believed that the
Board of Pharmacy had promulgat-
ed M rulas apaiuct drupoiet call
ing liquor. He said that he was out
of town when the alleged illegal sale
took place at his store and that his
clerks denied having made any sales
to the men who disclosed on him be-
fore the Grand Jury. Mr.. Bayliss said
that his sales of liquor, on doctors
orders, averaged about 65 per month
while Mr.. Barrett said that his sales
sometimes reached 1876 sales in the
same length of time and Mr.. Miner
admitted that his sales averaged
about 1875 per month.
Replying to a question, the three
druggists said that If allowed to re-
tain their certificates, they would new
er again engage in the sale of intox-
icating liquors, with or without IL
cense. None of them could say whe-
ther or not the Rutland Board OF
Aldermen was going to revoke their
licenses. In bringing the matter to a
close, DR.. Bellrose said:--