Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1910-02-25
BAD DAY FOR TIGERS"
WITH COURT OF APPEALS
Judgment of the Lower Court
in Cases of Four Con-
victionS Is Affirmed

n vas blind tiger day with the court
or appeals TUESDAY. aEd a mighty bad
day for the tiger at that When the
learned judges OF the court finished with
the members Of his tribe they were not
only blind. but staggering and out of
business.
Four decisions were rendered in cases
OF men convicted OF being various grades
OF tigers and in each case the decision
was against the tiger.
The most interesting OF these was the
case OF stradley vs. the city OF Atlanta
stradiey was convicted under the ordi-
nance prohibiting keeping liquor for I'M
lawful sale. He took the case by GER
tiorari to the superior court where the
certiorari was overruled. and from that
he took exception. The petition raises
many constitutional questions as TO the
legality OF the ordinance and as to the
power of the recorder to sentence him TO
the stoekade.
JUDGE PowELLS OPINION.
Judge Powell in his opinion said in
part: Small indeed would be the efiica-
cy Of our laws and police regulations II
the evil-minded could evade them by
such clumsy shifts as those resorted to
by The plaintiff in error. The common
sense OF the Law is not to be deceived
into believing that a thing has been
done. merely because il has been accom-
plished Indirectly rather than directly.
1T seems that Stradley had some con-
nection with firm Of liquor dealers In
Chattanooga. Tenn. who would ship by
express cases of liquor in the names of
different consignees. Stradley had what
ne termed Identification cards. which
seem 20 be cards directed to the express
agent, signed by him as agent for Car
roll & Co. Identifying the holder OF the
card as Mr.. So-and-So. the consignee of
the package bearing the address, Strad-
ley sold these cards for SO. and each card
entitled the bearer. under the arrange
ment which seemed TO prevail between
Stradley and the express agent. to go to
the express Office and get the case OF
liquor consigned to the person CactuaI or
fictitious) whose name appeared on the
card. Under this arrangement we have
no hesitsncy in holding that all who
were parties 10 il were guilty Of violating
the ordinance
The liquor was sent to the express Of
fee and kept there. manifestly. not for
the purpose of legitimate transportation,
but for the purpose Of unlawful sale. All
who participated in the selling or in as
sisting TO sell IL after IL arrived in At
the state prohibition law, but also OF
violating the city ordinance.
BLIND TIGER AN OSTRICH.
'-Stradley played ostrich. He merely
blinded himself with his beguiling scheme.
He Is caught and convicted: his supposed
constitutional protection is as nothing:
and the judgment OF the superior court
which upheld the conviction and sentence
is affirmed
OTHER TIGERS tanned.
In the case of Harry Dunbar rs. the
City OF Atlanta. which is similar to that
Of Loeb vs. Jennings recently decided by
the supreme court. the judgment OF the
lower court is affirmed in the following
language: ~Ar of the propositions of law
are controlled by the Instructions of the
supreme court in Loeb V. Jennings and are
therefore decided adversely TO the con-
tention OF the plaintiff in error"
IN the cases OF Harbuck VS.. the City OF
Atlanta and Whitley. vs.. the City of At
lanta. both OF which are similar to the
Loeb case which questioned the right OF
fhe recorder TO impose a stOckade SEN
-tence. the lower court was sustained and
the convicted men must serve sentence.