Case Name: Jeffries v. State
Court: Arkansas Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Arkansas
Decision Date: 1889-11
Citations: 52 Ark. 420
Docket Number: 
Parties: Jeffries v. State.
Judges: 
Reporter: Arkansas Reports
Volume: 52
Pages: 420–425

Head Matter:
Jeffries v. State.
1. Liquors: Sales by manufacturers of mine.
By section 15 of the license act of March 8, 1879, “ one who manufactures and sells wines from grapes, berries or other fruits, and who sells no other liquors,”1 is exempted from all the provisions of said act, and is therefore liable neither to the penalty fixed by section 5 for selling without a license, nor to that imposed by section 14 for keeping a drinking saloon or dram-shop without a license.
2. Same: Same.
Such manufacturer may sell as well through clerks or agents as by contracts, made with himself personally.
APPEAL from Woodruff Circuit Court.
M. T. Sanders, Judge.
Defendant was indicted for keeping a dram-shop without a license.
His defense was that he only sold, as agent for the Standard Wine Company, wine manufactured by said company in quantities not less than a quart, and in sealed bottles. The proof shows that some young men came into his store and bought a quart bottle of wine. They proceeded to open the bottle and drink the wine in the store. Defendant objected to their drinking the wine upon the premises or in the house.. He said that it was against his rules, and there was a sign posted over the door to the effect that it was against his rules, to drink wine on the premises. He afterwards sold them six or seven bottles, and made no further objection to their drinking in his store. They drank the wine in the back room of defendant’s store. The defendant was convicted and appealed.
Section 1 of the act of March 8, 1879, provides that it shall not be lawful “for any person to sell any ardent, vinous,, malt or fermented liquors * * * in any quantity or .for any purpose * * * without first procuring a license from the County Court.” A proviso to this section allows manufacturers of such liquors to sell them in original packages ■containing not less than five gallons. Section 5 of the act fixes the penalty for the sale prohibited by section 1. Section 14 of the same act is as follows : “Any person who shall keep a drinking saloon or dram-shop, without procuring a dram-shop or drinking saloon license, as provided by this act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor, and on conviction shall be fined in any sum not less than $200, nor' more than $500; and each day or part thereof the same is kept shall be deemed a separate offense.”
Section 15 of the same act is as follows : “ This act shall not be held to apply to one who manufactures and sells wines from grapes or berries, or other fruits, and who sells no other liquors, ardent, malt, vinous or fermented.”
J W. House, for appellant.
1. It was lawful to sell native wine manufactured by the seller, in sealed quart bottles. Act March 8, i8jg; 50 Ark., 132. The proof shows that appellant was not keeping a dram-shop. He was merely acting as agent of the Standard Wine Company, who were manufacturers, and he forbid the drinking on the premises. This was all he could do. 24 Tex., 132; 4g Ark.; 63.
He was authorized to sell and it .was immaterial whether the wine was drunk on the premises' or carried off and drunk. 4 S. E. Rep., 257.
Selling in quart bottles, sealed, does not constitute a dram-shop.
Under section 15 of the act, appellant is exempt from all the provisions of the act, even if he sold the wine by the drink.
W. E. Atkinson, Attorney General, and T. D. Crawford, for appellee.
Review the liquor laws and contend that appellant has not brought himself within the protection of section 15 of the license act, because, the dram-shop was not shown to belong to a manufacturer, and the drinking on the premises made appellant guilty of keeping a dram-shop. Rev. St., ch. 1‡8, sec. 2; act March 8, i8jg, secs, i, 1‡, 13, etc.; 6 Ark., 232,33.
The statute makes no exceptions in favor of the agent of a manufacturer. Only the manufacturer is exempt. 13 Pet., 165; 31 Ark., 100; 101 III., I2g.
Section 15 act 1879 does not permit the keeping of a dram-shop, even where the wines sold are exclusively of the vendor’s manufacture. If he desires to keep a dram-shop, he must take out a license.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Sale of Wines.
But three questions arise upon this record : 1st. Can a manufacturer of wine sell only by his personal contracts and deliveries, or may he. sell through clerks and agents ?
2d. Does section 15 of the act of March 8, 1879, exempt the manufacturer and seller from the operation of the fourteenth section of that act, as well as from that of section 1 ?
3d. Does the evidence show that defendants kept a dram-shop ?
Upon the first we hold that, as in all other commercial transactions, the manufacturer may sell by his agents.
Upon the second, we hold that by section 15 of said act the manufacturer of wine, who sells no other liquors, is exempted from the operation of the entire act.
As this disposes of the cause it is unnecessary to decide the third question.
Reverse and remand.