Ellsworth American., 1912-07-17
Bar Harbor Harbors Bars.


Recently one OF the Hancock county
deputy sheriffs, William Puffer by name,
was summarily dismissed by Sheriff Jelli-
son without cause alleged. The Bangor
Commercial reported that he ''tendered
his resignation, but this appears to have
been a misstatement. The Bar Harbor
Record reports the facts, and comments
upon them as follows:
Deputy Sheriff Puffer on June 2s received
bis discharge as deputy sheriff in writing,
with legal seal attached, signed by otha
Jellison. sheriff, no reason being given for
his summary dismissal from the office of
deputy sheriff.
The day before, June Is, Deputy Sheriff
Pafer warned eight saloon-keepers In Bar
Harbor, whose saloons were "wide open" in
every sense Of the word, that they must not
sell Sundays or after ie p. m. Mr.. Putfer
thought that in doing this he was not only
within the law, which is perfectly obvious,
but he believed that the sheriff Of the county
would back him up in this action.
The saloon-keepers defed Deputy Sheriff
puffer and warned him that he would lose his
Job. The next day he lost it. Mr.. Puffer
claims that he lost his job because he was
Objectionable to the liquor men of the town.
He also claims that the liquor men control
Sheriff Jellison and that Sheriff Jeliison will
appoint or discharge whosoever the liquor
men wish in the Office of deputy sheriff.
So it appears that notification is prac-
ticed in Hancock also, aud that the Ban
gor plan extends to Bar Harbor, which
may be regarded as suburb of Bangor.
There is no occasion for surprise at this,
however. 1t is merely in keeping with
the notification policy of the present
regime. The law is partially enforced or
enforced not at all, according to the no
tions of the semi-independent sheriff
satraps of the several counties.
At Bar Harbor it is enforced not at all,
even to the extent Of limiting and fixing
the hours in which the unlawful traffic
may be carried on. That is wherein the
offending Of the deputy consists. He had
the presumptuousness to bid the rum
shops close on Sundays and after 10 p. m.
He Thought that in doing this he was
within the law".
What law? There is no law but the will
Of the sheriff, and the will OF the sheriff
is influenced by the wishes of the rum
trust, which is the source OF campaign
funds. Pufier made fatal mistake. To
be sure, there is something on the statute
book about prohibition of the sale OF ia-
toxicating liquor and about its being the
particular duty of sheriffs and county at
torneys to enforce this law. But the law
was suspended January 1, 1911, the same
day on which Lamont A. Stevens began
his stunt of saving the credit OF the State,
and it has been a dead letter ever since.
Mr.. Puffer should have known better
than to NEEDLE. He should have known
better than to interfere with the profits of
rumseliers- Why should they have to
shut up shop at 10 p. m, and on Sundays?
Why, these were times when trade wa
the briskest and the profits the biggest
No wonder the saloonists were peevish.
II deputy wants to keep his job under
any Of the Plaisted sheriffs, he must be
conveniently blind and deaf to what is
going on. He should know that such
acting as this of Puffer's is regarded as
pernicious in these piping times OF the
uncovered bridge. And so Puffer loses
his Official head for enforcing the law even
in small part. Let his fate be a warning
to others.