Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 36, Number 119, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 18 October 1904 — TH? ??BS??E SALOON OWNER. [ARTICLE]

TH? ??BS??E SALOON OWNER.

inaisnapolis News:—The Appaelate Court, by its decision in the Dudley case, struck a heavy blow at the practice of allowing one man to oouduct a saloon under a license.issued to anjther one The principle of the decision ought to be generally applied. In the Dudley case the man holding the license bad moved out of the county, leaving hi a saloon in oharge of a barkeeper, The same reasoning would apply to brewing companies whioh hold licenses for scores of saloons under the charge managers as virtual owners. For -the same evils result here as those [spoken of by Judge Black iu his [opinion,, which was that of the court. He said: 1 It is contemplated not merely that the licenses shonld remain within limits where he may be reaohed by legal prooess, but also that he should remain where he would have the ability to see personally that the business is carried on within the res Irictlons placed on it by law. The lioense is a personal prfvelege, not transferable, and the personal fitness of the licenses is a matter of legislative concern, not merely when he is an applicant, but also at all times while enjoying the privilege. There is no difference in reason between a nonresident saloon owner, and a saloon owner who farms out the privileges conferred on him by the license issued to him personally. The man that runs the saloon ought to be the one holding the license. The relation between the State and the saloon keeper, if there is to be one at all, ought to be direct, to the end that responsibilty may be enforced. Whether this is the law we do not know, but we do know that the reasoning of the opinion in the Dudley case applies as well to resident as to nonresident licensees, provided the former take no part in carrying on the business. This is specially true of corporations that own saloons, for you can not Eend a corporation to the workhouse for violating the law. We should like to see a case made in which this question co uld be presented,