Year: 1879

make tie vendor of intoxicating liquors
liable for damages caused by the sale of
the same to irresponsible persons. 1t is
to be hoped that this law will effect the
object sought, but our observation and
experience incline us to regard it rs a
doubtful experiment. As an abstract
right, we cannot see why public carrier
persons and property which may occur
In his business; the hotel keeper to loss
es of property sustained by guests in his
house, and the liquor seller he exempt
from damages liable to occur from his
own recklessness or design in selling IN
toxicating drinks to drunken persons
who are known to be utterly incapable
OF self-control when under the influence
of Intoxicating drinks No man Of "gooH
moral character would SELF or give
liquor to such persons, and our laws
specially charge the authorities to whom
are delegated the power to grant licenses
to retail intoxicating drinks. not to Ii
cense any persons not of "good moral
character" II our public officials will
not obey the law under oath, how can
we expect 1t to be enforced by the peo
pie at large? That there are many per~
sons of good moral character and high
social standing engaged in the liquor
traffic-some under the authority of the
United States cannot be disputed. The
act under consideration makes no dis
elimination between the wholesale liquor
dealer and the keeper OF the doggery
who is the really guilty party; all who
deal in the liquor which caused The in
toxication, in whole or in part, are made
alike liable The enforcement of the law
will be found utterly impracticable, and
the attemut will cost much more than it
will come to, from the difficulty of fixing
theresponslbility where it properly be-
longs in the judgment of a popular jury.
over thirty years ago, with Others, We
worked very earnestly to procure the
passage OF "a similar act by the Wisconsin
| Legislature. 1t was tried just one year
! The law was repealed at the next session
of the Legislature by an almost una"i-
nous vote.


The other act passed by the Legisla-
ture relating to the liquor traffic, provi~
ding for the guardianship of confirmed
drunkarts, is an old law OF England, and
was a statute law of New York over fifty
years ago, and may be yet. We never
heard any objection to it:


SECTION 1. Be 1T Enacted dsttls-zes;.
1sttre -44ssess111sste et tie Ie-rttsrye ~ssA-
iagscn:- Every husband, wife, child,
parent, guardian, employer or other
person. who shall be injured in person
or property, or means OF support hy any
intoxicated person, or in consequence of
the intoxication, habitual. or otherwise,
of any person, shall have n right Of ac
ton in lis or her own name, severally or
jointly against any person or persons
who shall, by selling or giving intoxicat-
ing liquors, have caused the intoxication
in whole Or in part of such person and
any person or persons owning, ienting,
leasing or permitting the occupation of
any building or premises, and having
knowledge that Intoxicating liquors are
to be sold therein, or who have leased
the same for other purposes, shall know
ingly permit therein the sale Of any in
/ toxicating liquors, shall, if any such
liquors sold or given therein, have caused,
in whole or in part, the intoxication of
any person be liable severally or jointly
with the persons selling or giving the in
toxicating liquors as aforesaid, for all
damages sustained, and the same may be
recovered in a civil action in any court
Of competent jurisdiction. A married
woman may bring such action in her own
name, and all damages recovered by her
shall enore to her separate use; and all
damages recovered by minor under this
act shall he paid either TO such minor or
to such person i'll trust for him, and on
such terms as the court may direct. In
case of the death of either party, the ac-
ton and right of action, to or against
his executor or administrator, shall sur
vive.


i SEC No license for the sale of in