Tonopah daily bonanza. [volume] (Tonopah, Nev.) 1906-1929, 1910-09-09


which he or she proposes to do
such business, and pay therefor the
sum of ten dollars per MONTH The
provisions have no bearing on this
case.
"The argument of the district at
torney bore largely upon the fact
that dispose Of as used in the act,
includes the idea of sale. The ar
gument of counsel for the club, in
effect admitting this, was directed
toward the word business as used
in the act. Adopting this as the
controlling word, he contended that
the legislature intended to impose
the license tax upon the business of
selling liquors at retail, and upon
it as business only. His argu-
ment naturally followed then that
the University club is not engaged
in the selling of liquor as a bust
ness, but as mere incident to it's
business, which in SO far as such a.
club has business, is the providing
! for the social pleasure and comfort
of it's members and their guests.
ut is admitted by the agreed
F, statement Of facts that the defend
ant is bona fide social club, and
is not conducted for the purpose of
evading the liquor license law.
'sThe problem then, is whether,
nevertheless, 1t Is subject to the
payment of retail liquor license
taxes.
1T appears that the decisions are
various and conflicting; but that
with few exceptions, it has been
held that, where the club is incor-
porated, it is amenable to the liquor
Tlaws.-20 N. S. l.. R. A. 1895.
Two important cases were de-
cided early in 1909, Gunner VS.. Cal
ifornia club, 100 Pac. 868, and state
of Minnesota VS.. Minnesota club,
119 N. w. 494. The former holds
in favor of the club; the latter
against it.
"In the former Chief Justice
Beatty concurs, but only on the
!. ground that no demand was made on
the California club for five years af-
ter the passage of the ordinance,
; he drawing the unavoidable infer
; ence that 1t was the common UNDER
standing Of the municipal authori-
ties that the course of dealing Z.
was not the carrying on Of the
business of retailing liquors. How
; ever, he says; II we had been
called upon, shortly after its adop-
: ton, to give construction to the
ordinance. 49,. Il should not have
8 entertained doubt that the Cali
fornia club was clearly within its
Q terms
!, THE Minnesota club case turns
upon the word SALE as do many
:, other similar cases; but counsel for
: the club took the same position as
here: That the statute is intended
: to regulate the retail business or
traffic, and is not applicable to a
bona fide social club
Before proceeding further 1t is
+ proper to discuss the relation of the
word business to the word sale
Webster's International Dictionary,
=, 1906, gives seven definitions of the
If word business Only the first and
IF third of these have any bearing
le here. The first is the one, nc
9, doubt, that best fits the contention
A. A. of the defendant herein. That which
r. engages the time, attention or labor
ID of any one as his principal concern
t, or interest The third is: 'Finan
cial dealings; buying and selling
~ traffic in general; mercantile trans
lie actions Careful attention to tn,
a az words financial mercantile an,
s. traffic. as used in the definition
D., indicates quite clearly that this def
* hinition taken as whole means Bu
little more than buying an
Is .selling.'i sa1 tefa ga lsas
SO. it seems that we have tw
~, definitions Of this word one Z
ng broad Specification, and the othe
M spracticallyai nothing more tina
aid buying and selling: We amu.
in now adopt one or the other, unle.
perf We can use both. and at this roii
I'M it becomes important To- ascertaj
md u,bo+bar an 1aa 49,.
ley .nel law cser Iecoshi1est'
ner man or corporation as having MOI
nrt than enc business We may rsadi
"a discover that it does. and to- dos
,eto so no further than the license -
81 under discussion that ofit1ss
ar, Sections 122 ofithis act, referring
son Tavern ,hotel, eor 1nnckeeperss eco
~ ,tains these weTds1 70 ssrsslsis.