South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1918-02-24
FIGHT ON DRY LAW
DRAWS ATTENTION
Case in Vanderburgh County
Watched With Interest in
All Parts of Indiana.

INDIANAPOLIs Feb -s.-No
law suit in this state. with the eN-
ceDtion Of the two involving the
right Of women 20 vote and the
question OF a new constitution, has
attracted so much attention. and
has been followed so closely as has
the pending suit in the Wander
burgh county superior court. involv-
ing the COnsututi0uality OF the
statewide prohibition law In the
cases concerning the proposed new
constitution and woman suffrage
an appeal from the county courts 90
the state supreme court was regard
Cd as agreed upon from the begin
niuS. Until recently the public has
taken IL for granted that the prohibit
ton law suit at Evansville would be
appealed to the supreme court as
quickly as possible. No definite an
nouncement along that line has been
made but lawyers point out various
possibilities ia an appeal or refusal
20 appeal by either side
To date the court rulings. which
have been on what are regarded as
the preliminary legal moves preced-
ing trial. have been in favor of the
contentious of the interests desiring
the law declared void The suit was
Med in Evansville by brewing COM
panies. who asked that the prosecut-
ing attorney Of Nanderburgh county
he enjoined from prosecuting them
for continuing i'm business after April
= the date set for the law 20 be-
come effective.
Prosecutor Files Plea.
The prosecutor filed what is
known as "A plea in abatement. but
IL was overruled He then filed a
demurrer To the complaint. That
also was overruled, and in doing SO
Judge +. NJ. Hostetter Of the Wander
burgh superior court, announced the
law TO be unconstitutional. The
judge said incidentally ne believed
that the plaintiffs were entitled TO an
injunction before the law became
effective in order 10 protect them
selves from danger of financial loss.
The prosecutor had argued that an
injunction sho=ld not be issued until
the law was in effect and he could
institute action TO enforce its penal
ties.
In the meantime EIe Stansbury,
the attorney general of the state.
had sought permission of the Van
derburgh court TO be made a party
% the suit. Permission was refused.
the court holding the plaintiffs in an
injunction suit may choose whom
they desire to enjOin. While the
case now is ready for trial in the
court at Evansville. on its merits.
an sppeal may, if the defense so de-
sires. be taken 10 the state supreme
court on Judge Hostetter's ruling on
the demurrer. bat questions of law
only would be raised. while by wait
ing until after trial. both the ques-
tions of INV and fact may be pre-
scented 10 the higher court at one
time
May Refuse 10 Appeal.
The peculiar phases of the case
include the possibility OF refusal
of either side TO appeal from an ad-
verse decision Of the lower court.
The suit as 10 now stands is against
the prosecution of Vanderburgh
county. and any decision or ruling
made in the Vanderburgh superior
court is effective only within the
bounds Of Nanderburgh county If
the court should rule finally i'm fav-
or Of the liquor interests in the case.
and enjoin the prosecutor. and he
should refuse To take an appeal. the
plaintiffs would have won i'm the one
county only The law would be-
come effective in all the other 81
counties OF the state. unless the
brewery interests instituted suits in
each OF them, and final decision in
the county court at Evansville fav-
ors the law. il viii become effective
i'm all counties of the state. except
other suits should be filed against il
IN other counties and sustained. or
unless the breweries appealed and
should get a favorable decision from
the supreme court before April %
Saloon Keepers Active.
In the meantime saloon keepers
i'm many cities are taking steps to
protect themselves. The Proctor
law limits the number of saloons. ac-