Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1913-08-09
md had no intent at any time Of doing

and had no intent at any time of doing
SO.
8. That during the time ever since
March 4, 1913, said +. Erbacher had
and possessed a residence in Ottum.
wa, Iowa, but did not have or possess
a place where he engaged in lawful
business; and during all of that time
he had no right to keep with intent to
sell, or sell intoxicating liquors in
Iowa to any person or for any pur
pose whatsoever, and that the beer
and liquors delivered to j. Erbacher
by the defendant, was not delivered to
him at his residence or any establish
ed place of lawful business in Ottum'
wa, Iowa, but elsewhere in said city
and these facts were we'll known to the
defendant at the time of the delivery
lily it, of the beer and liquors above
mentioned.
10. I further find that at the time
and each of the times, that J. Lrbacher
purchased the liquors above mention.
ed, and during the time they were be
ing transported and delivered to him
and after they were delivered to him
he was the sole person interested there
III and he intended, all of the time
to receive and possess with intent to
sell, the beer and liquors in Ottumwa.
in violation Of the laws of the state OF
Iowa. That his purpose and intent in
the purchase, possession and use OF
the liquors from the time of purchase
was made, and while being transport.
ed, and as long as the liquors were in
his custody and control, was to sell
the same in violation of the laws OF
the state of Iowa.
II. The defendant at the time OF
the delivery OF the beer and the liquors
to j. Erbacher did not have notice OF
actual knowledge that he was buying
or receiving the same with the intent
and purpose OF selling it in violation OF
law, but was in possession of such
facts that upon reasonable inquiry, II
would have ascertained he was buying
and receiving and holding beer and
liquor, with intent to sell the same in
violation of the laws of Iowa, and Is
therefore, chargeable with such know
ledge.
Section No. 2419 of the Code Of Iowa
provides:
IF any express or railway company
or any common carrier or person, OF
anyone as the agent or employee there
Of, shall transport or convey to any
person within this state any i~ntxociat
ing liquors, without first having been
furnished with a certificate from the
clerk Of the court issuing the permit
showing that the c%onsignee is a per
nit holder and authorized to sell iq'
ors in the county to which the ship
ment is made, such company, common
carrier, person, agent or employe
thereof, shall, upon conviction, be
fined, ETC."
And section No. 1884 provides:
Whoever shall erect, establish, con,
tinue or use any building, erection OF
place for any of the purposes herein
prohibited, Is guilty Of a nuisance, and
upon conviction shall pay a flne of not
less than three hundred dollars mol
more than one thousand dollars and
costs of prosecution, which shall in
clude q reasonable attorneys fee to
be taxed by the court, and stand com
mitted to the county Jail until such
fine and costs r paid and the build
ing, erection or place, or the ground
itself, IN or upon which such unlawful
manufacture or sale or keeping with
intent to sell, use or give away said
liquors is carried on or continued OF
exists, and the furniture, fixtures
vessels and contents, are also declar
cd a nuisance, and in addition to the
Penalties thereinbefore affixed, shall be
abated as hereinafter provided"
The point was made by the defend
! ant. that even If all the questions OF
interstate commerce should be elimin
ated from tn, issues, and it should be
conceded that the defendant had
knowledge that Erbacher intended tc
sell the liquors, in violation of the
laws OF Iowa, nevertheless 1t can not
be found, that within the mean
Ting Of the above quoted sec
ton No. 1884, the defendant has
|"erected,1 established, continued or
used" any building, erection, or place
for any of the purposes prohibited by
the code, and that consequently, the
Injunction prayed for should not issue,
| While the point was made, yet 1t was
not deliberately discussed by counsel on
either side. 1t rests on matters large
ly in the nature of technicalities; and
the purpose and intent of our liquor
laws to keep Intoxicating liquors be
iyond the reach Of those who would or
might use them as a beverage, and to
excess, being manifest and intense, a
court would lot be justified in re
fusing an injunction, or n other
remedy that is known to judicial pro-
cedure, fairly adapted to the promo
ton of that commendable purpose and
intent, unless substantial reasons,
plain and beyond fair doubt, exists fol-
such holding, which do not appear In
this case, therefore, upon that ground
alone the injunction prayed for, should
! not be refused.
The foregoing findings and consider
alton. Of necessity raise %squarely fo1
determination, whether or not the
"Webb.Kenyon" law when, considered
alone or in connection with section
2419 of the code Of Iowa, Is contrary
ito and contravention Of section No. 9
of article No. s Of the constitution Of
the United States which among other
things provides: Congress shall have
power, to regulate comrperce with
foreign nations, and among the several
states, and with Indian tribes" which
:~I.I~aa1d ooA 3~e{efnJ ,,nnp hyy tho do.