The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1911-06-15


 the custom of dispensing liquor tc members of bona fide clubs, as prac- ticed for years in this State without ! prosecution, may be continued with out further moaestation from the au- thorities, is the claim of Attorney Sanford Stoddard, president of the University Club, who was tried before Judge Foster of the city court today dor violation of the excise laws in connection with the dispensing of li- Guor to club members.
 The question of the guilt or inno- cence of Attorney Stoddard is merely the hinge upon which turns the whole attitude of the prosecuting authorities towards clubs in this city.
 The tEiaI, of the president of the University Club differs. as pointed out by Judge Foster, from that of the stewards of the five clubs recently while the stewards of the other clubs admitted that they made sales of H. quors, Stoddard as the representative of the University Club, denies that his club makes sales, within the meaning of the statute tin the use of the word s'sale."
 He contends. that a club organized for legitimate purposes, in which the use of intoxicating liquor is incidental has a right to sell liquor to it's mem bers, and in the statement of facts ia greed to between Prosecutor Green stein and himself, it is set forth that the University Club did on Sunday, June.4, and ever since it's organiza ton 5n 1905. make it practice to dispense 1iquor among it's members. for which the members paid in proportion to the share they used.
 TnI ~ aY,1lV laf yUo e associated with MT. Stoddard in the defence of the clubman when the case came before Judge Foster today. Prosecutor Greenstein represented the tState There was a very small at Tendance in the court room.
 Attorney Stoddard entered plea of mot guilty to the charge of keeping and selling liquors without a license at 263 Golden Hill street on June 4. sThen he read the statements of facts lagreed upon between the contending iceunsel- <
 \ This went into the history of the or Akyaniza ton, told of it's purposes, ex- MFained the system by which liquor is E1epensed-the members signing a ich eek for the amount of the drink. Iansl settling monthly-and admitted lthai. since organization the club had hnak ,tained government license for rhe ale of intoxicants.
 Aft,- g the brief statement of facts, tcounset submitted exhaustive briefs. Ecoveritg g liquor cases from Maine to tCaliforilfa, and even going to far away Eneian6 Nor cases to substantiate their opposing claims.
 At the outset Attorney Stoddard said Srne was 1,eRdy to supply any further Enformatior' the prosecution or court desired rela tive to the clubs methods soe doing business, though he had att hempted to ,Aover tho situation fully Ep hfs staterh ant of facts
 Arguing his brief, Prosecutor Green retein pointed out that 1t contained de- tcisions that aph Aared to differ. Among Ffhose that sust ained the attitude of hhe defence. he .4eid, were New York, tPennsylvania, Mississippi, Massachu- ,setts, while those that sustained the contention of theA prosecution that clubs couldn't legally sell, included H. Hinois, Maryland, La'uisiana, New Jer- Isey, Alabama, Nort,h Carolina, Ken nia, Washington Geo, ,gia, District of Eoiumbia. Ohio, and Maine. The fConnecticut court of Vast resort has a1ever passed on the dNestion at is- sue.
 He pointed out that session 2SsO pro- sale, or the keeping with AAtent to sell DOT expose for sale, of into Afcating li- uuors, without a license. And he pointed out further that Seotion 2719 provides that the possession Of a U. E. government license is prfrna facie evidence of intent to sell
 Attorney Greenstein pointed out also Hhat this case was in the ma ture of establishing a precedent. He said he had attempted to place the case; clear By before the court, and the question Ito be decided was not whether a club in selling liquor made a profit or sus- fained loss, but whether it is NeGal Ito transfer the liquor of the club No Hhe individual And Attorney GreAn-, istein admitted that if the court heldN the view that 1t was legal to do so. l there were several decisions to uphold | that view. But the more recent de- | pcisions. in Maine, Washington and | Colorado, in 1909, maintained that such a transaction does constitute a sale and Is therefore against the law.
 Attorney Stoddard said he had no | fault to find with the action of Prose | pcutor Greenstein, whose attitude he | characterized as that of a zealous of | fcer of the court. He prefaced his | arguments with a brief recital of the l History of the club situation in the | city. He told Of the vast number of | apparent violations of liquor laws which have been discovered under the | Euise of clubs
 In passing upon such a case, as to | whether the club was organized for the mere evasion of the liquor law.
 
 by the location of the club. its social | activity and such features as enter into its regular club life. <
 He said there were dozen clubs | in Bridgeport the good faith of which would not be questioned, and of these all but one. he had been led to be- lieve, had followed for years the cus- tom prevailing sat the club in question. And the condition is such he argued that it is the duty of the court to enunciate a rule of law that will serve to perpetuate the present customs
 In the absence of ruling from the state Supreme court he quoted from d charge of Judge Wolf of the New Haven common pleas court which he said ought to guide the local court, in a similar case in which the New Haven judge is quoted as having said that while it is true that d club has the right to dispense liquors to it's members. it has not the right to en- ter into the same relations with out siders.
 T assume I would not be wrong if | I said that every member of the Leg islature is a member of some social club that dispenses liquor. I assume that perhaps without exception every | member of the Judiciary of this State Is q member of some club that dis