Arizona republican., 1910-03-16

q week or two of reaching his ma
 jority. and whose appearance Was that of a grown man, so that the per
 son selling it to him might properly
 have supposed him to be of age. That. unless there was some such eXtenu- ! ating circumstance of that sort, where
 a violation of the law was proved
 subsequent tu the itme of this Hayes , revocation. 1 should revoke the license. ! That where matters were brought be-
 fore me showing only violations of
 the law prior to the time ol the Hayes
 license revocation. I should not re-
 yoke the license. except the case were d fragrant one As l say. it seems
 to me these are the rules that should
 be applicable to these five cases now
 before me | regret that the example
 made by the Hayes case has not seemed to be sufficient for not only are the cases before me such as to tend to show that there has been q violation of the law since the Hayes 1 case. but ais am told there are five other cases pending. showing viola
 tions of the law by saloonkecpers ap Ign sMoqs lgqL 'omn lrql souls saIoonkecpers have not appreciated 
 their licenses revoked since the re- vocation of the Hayes license. but that if they have appreciated it. they have taken chance. and have on the chance of being detected in d vio- [ lation. sold liquor to minors.
 Now. in these cases before me. the first case is No. 5s0>. the Anhcuser saloon. The evidence there is that 1 there has been no violation of the law since the revocation of the Hayes ! license. The evidence of these two boys is that last summer they got each of them a drink there. There is evidence from one of these boys and he himself admits it. that the bar keeper at vTe time when he attempted [" get drink. took the glass away from him and refused to sell it to him. There Is no evidence as I see of any sales since last November. and since the time of the Hayes rcvoca ton. IL seems to me that in the dis cretiun invested in the court. while the facts may be and think they are. proved of the sale last summer to these minors. not to revoke the license in that case. and that will be the order entered.
 The next case is No. 5s0a the Arizona Investment company. the saloon Of Doll. There is the same state of facts-nn sale. or any at tempted proof of any sale since last November. There have been shown by the prosecutiun's own witness two instances of rcfusals to sell |" mi nors in that saloon think there has been bona fide attempt to stop the sale of liquor in that saloon. at least s" far as the evidence before me k concerned. While it Iuay be there is sufficient proof to establish the fact of the sale of liquor to minors last summer. and may say inciden- tally here that I think there is no question whatever that during last ! summer liquor was sold to minors in | many saloons in this town. without 1 any respect to the law whatever. Since ! there has been no sale since last No ! vember. shall not revoke the license | in that case. and that will be the or der entered.
 "in case No sg10. t;,c Phoenix i Amusement company. the Casino sa- loon. one boy testifies to having | bought liquor or beer there after the ! revocation of the Hayes license. one l boy testifies to having bought a pint of whisky there some time during the present year. I think there is no doubt of the fact of the sale as testi- fled by the boy-that is. q sale since the revocation of the Hayes license. In addition to that. it is apparent from the testimony that at times boys were allowed to loiter in that saloon. although they did not. under their testimony. buy anything at that time to drink Now. our statutes provide that no minor under the age of sixteen years shall be allowed to remain in saloon. These boys were { over that age at that time. therefore the statutes do not apply. but it is a take into account in determining I. whether or not a license should be revoked. namely. that saloonkecpers ] do permit boys under the age of to loiter in and about their saloons. While not against the law at the same time it is an un- desirable thing for the saloonkcepers to allow to be done because of the it gives boys to obtain liquor in the saloon. The fact that this sale was made since the reVoca- tion of the Hayes license at the Casino saloon in addition to sales last it seems to me that in the should in that instance order the