Monday, 10th November 1913: War Is Declared On Beer Saloons And Locker Clubs, The Atlanta Constitution

Reading Time: 12 minutes [2038 words]

Committee Appointed to

Take Up Matter of Law

Enforcement With Police

Chief and Grand Jury.

LIQOUR BOTTLES SHOWN

AT MEETING ON SUNDAY

Audience

Told They Were

Purchased From Clubs

by Non-MembersNear

Beer Saloons

Attacked.

War to the knife was declared on the

breweries, near beer saloons and locker clubs operating in Atlanta and the

state of Georgia, and a committee of twenty-five representative clients was

appointed to take up the matter of law enforcement with the police authorities

and the grand jury at the mass meeting held Sunday afternoon in the Grand

theater, which was called by the Georgia Anti-Saloon league for the

consideration of measures which will prohibit the sale of intoxicants in the

state of Georgia.

More than 1,000 prohibition leaders

attend the meeting, which was marked by a degree of earnestness of purpose at:

directness seldom witnessed at any similar gathering.

Whisky Shown at Meeting.

A number of exhibits, in the form of

unbroken pints and half-pints of whisky were shown the meeting, and while the

names of the clubs from which the liquor were purchased were withheld, it was

declared by Dr. L. M. DuBose, who presided over the meeting, that drastic

measures would at once be taken to prevent the further illegal sale of

intoxicants in Atlanta. It appears that certain locker clubs and fraternal

orders have not made their sales of liquors have not made their sales of

liquors and beer in strict accordance with the state prohibition laws; that

they have issued membership cards to rank outsiders, and have furnished these

persons with all the intoxicants they desired. It was further declared that the

near beer saloons of Atlanta are operating in open violation of the prohibition

law.

Various speakers on the program

strongly intimated that steps would at once be taken to close these alleged

illegal resorts by action of the grand jury and through an immediate appeal to

Police Chief Beavers to put a stop to the operations of all the saloons and

clubs that are not complying with the strict letter of the law.

Resolutions were read and adopted,

asking the city and state authorities to put an immediate stop to the alleged

flagrant violations of the law in the sale of intoxicants, and a number of

speeches were made in which the movement for nation-wide prohibition was

enthusiastically advocated.

Enforce Law, Demands Richards.

The principal address of the meeting

was delivered by J. B. Richards, of the Georgia Anti-Saloon league executive

committee, who spoke, in part, as follows:

Though reluctant to make any public

statement at this time. I am impelled by a sense of duty to say a few words

which shall be as temperate as I can command.

The law that prohibits the sale of

intoxicating liquors in Georgia marks the culmination of a great political and

economic movement that has been gathering strength and impetus for more than

forty years, and is the exponent of a deep-seated humane and patriotic

aspiration of our people.

The notorious and appalling violations

of this declared will of the law-making bodies of the state are daily

accompanied by expressions of ridicule and defiance on one hand and are

constantly received with deplorable indifference on the part of those who are

charged with the enforcement of the prohibition laws.

At the so-called legitimate clubs,

these violations are in general confined to sales to members or their guests.

They are not any the less violations of the law and this statement is sustained

by judicial decrees.

Violate the Law.

Private barkeepers violate the law in

even more flagrant measure, and openly sell liquor to all customers who comply

with the flimsy regulations that are designed solely to furnish excuses for the

avoidance of official intervention.

Every keg of beer that is brewed under

corporate charters and every glass that is sold in a saloon is equally lawless,

and the shame of it is aggravated by the ridiculous pretext that calls the beer

by some name unknown to the law.

The alleged licenses under which these

acts are cloaked afford no authority for the violations. Lawless conditions

such as these are intolerable under any decent government, for the reason that

they breed contempt for the law, and the inevitable result must be that the

lawless elements will dominate the state unless the state rebukes them by

enforcing the laws now in effect.

The officials now in office apparently

are not courageous to the extent that they will carry out the letter of the law

and thus do the peoples will. When the voters register their will not only in

passing prohibitory laws, but in the choosing of public officials, then and

then only, will the sale of liquor cease in Georgia.

Wants Justice to All.

I warn you that no remedy for the

evils, complained of will be effective that does not begin with an end to the

near beer saloons and the bogus clubs. So far as I am personally concerned, I

do not care to see the mercenary clubs dealt with unless equal justice is meted

to one and all.

In conclusion let me say that the

prohibition law in Georgia is going to be enforced, and this in spite of the

criminal and mercenary element, but the accomplishment of this prediction will

come only when the people reach the point where they will be as steadfast and

constant for the establishment of their lawful principles as are the lawless in

fighting for anarchy, and never except as the result of civic consecration by

the masses, expressed in personal courage and endeavor and exacting devotion to

equality for all concerned.

Here Are Resolutions.

The resolutions adopted, which include

the names of the members of the committee appointed at Sundays meeting, are as

follows:

We, citizens of the city of Atlanta, in

mass meeting assembled, on this, the 9th day of November, 1913, do

make and enter

Continued on Page Twelve.

WAR IS

DECLARED

ON BEER SALOONS

Continued From Page One.

upon the

declarations and plans set forth in the following resolutions, viz:

Whereas we believe that laws meant for

the suppression of vice, the prevention of drunkenness and the dissociation of

the state from complicity in the traffic in ardent spirits and other

intoxicants are amongst the most necessary and urgent regulations that society

can adopt, and that they should, both as to their letter and spirit, bind the

conscience of every honest man and loyal citizen; and,

Whereas, we believe that the

enforcement of such laws should become the highest ideal of society and enlist

the energy and tireless devotion of every loyal and law-loving citizen; and

Whereas, the state of Georgia has

enacted easily understood and stringent laws against the manufacture, sale and

dispensing of intoxicating liquors of all kinds; and

Whereas, it is known that these

violations of law are not confined to the so-called criminal element of

society, but have been procured, abetted and countenanced, we regret to say, by

some organizations which represent affiliations of many who claim to stand in

reputable and responsible relations to the social and commercial life of the

community; now, therefore,

Resolved, first. That it is the sense

of this mass meeting that these flagrant and persistent violations of law

should be denounced as both criminal and tre
asonable and worthy of execration

by all law-loving people, and that every possible legal step individual

violators of these laws, and, as well, the responsible or culpable

representatives of all organizations or corporations engaged in the sale of

intoxicating liquors, or in the illegal dispensing of the same.

Resolved, second, That this meeting

hereby calls upon the police authorities of the city to undertake the most

searching inquiry into the charges that many locker clubs and other social

organizations are systematically violating the prohibition laws of the state,

and that sales of liquor are being made openly on the streets. The attention of

the present grand jury of Fulton county is also called to these charges which

are common currency on the streets and elsewhere. In this connection we cite

with indorsement the judicial charge of Hon. Benjamin H. Hill, of the superior

court, namely, that it is not an individual opinion or prejudice that is to

determine the officer of the law or the responsible citizen as to his attitude

or action, but the majesty of the law itself. All men charged with authority

must exhaust that authority before the bar of their own consciences, and in the

judgement of all just and upright men. We set it forth not only as our own

conviction, but as an axiom, a proven principle of justice, that there cannot

be a law for the confessedly criminal elements of society and another for the

self-appraised respectable offender. The latter are the more dangerous, by far,

of the two. If the fabric of our social order is in any real danger, it is from

men who hold themselves superior to law and claim immunity by reason of this or

that social accident. We call for a strict enforcement of law without regard to

class, condition, social or commercial accident.

Resolved, third, That it be ordered by

this meeting that a committee of twenty-give, or more, to be known as the law

enforcement committee of Atlanta, be immediately formed to take in hand the

execution of the plans herein outlined, and that, as the continuous and

self-perpetuating representative of this mass meeting, the said committee is

hereby authorized to employ legal counsel and use all legal and legitimate

means to abate and stop the lawless acts herein complained of, both by

procuring restraining orders from the courts and by such other legal processes

as may appear to be best calculated to accomplish the ends sought.

Resolved, fourth, That the following

named citizens be asked and they are hereby commissioned to serve as members of

the committee to be known as the law enforcement committee of Atlanta, viz.:

Thomas Glenn, R. R. Kime, Walker

Dunson, H. M. Dubose, W. H. Davidson, Loyd B. Parks, Charles W. Daniel, Hugh K.

Walker, E. W. Rose, W. A. Albright, Lee Hagan, W. A. Ward, W. P. Anderson,

Charles D. McKinney, R. A. Hemphill, W. S. Loftis, L. T. Stallings, J. W.

Awtry, George Gordon, J. A. Willingham, J. E. Wilhelm, L. O. Bricker, W. S.

Witham, J. H. Andrews, Eb T. Williams.

This committee will hold its first

meeting on Tuesday.

PAGE 4, COLUMN 1

THE FRANK CASE

In a short

while the issue of the life or death of Leo Frank will be fought out before the

supreme court of the state.

He will not

approach the court as a Jew or a Gentile, a beggar or a millionaire. He will be

simply a man in legal peril of his life.

The six

justices who sit upon the bench are men of unimpeachable character. Their

professional equipment is unquestioned. At every angle they are qualified to

administer the law with minds single to justice and closed to all extraneous

influences.

There are

many who are wholly sincere in their belief in Franks guilt. Many believe with

unshakable faith that Frank is the innocent victim of circumstances. These two

beliefs are, of course, fixedly incompatibly. It is between the two that the

supreme court must come as final arbiter.

A court of

last resort can have nothing in common with prejudice, racial or otherwise.

Bias of any nature must be an alien to its counsels. It is and must be

concerned solely with the righteous administration of justice under the law and

the evidence. It will undoubtedly discharge the function of weighing that

evidence with scrupulous impartiality. Where the evidence is sufficient to

support the verdict, the verdict should stand. If it regards the evidence as

insufficient in this case the verdict should be set aside, and the accused be

given a new trial.

And it is

before a court with these exalted attributes that the supreme legal fight of

the Frank case will be staged. The supreme court of Georgia will come as near

finding the justice of this mysterious case as can be expected of any tribunal

ruled by human beings. It is fully competent to pass upon the many troublous

issues here involved. If the court writes its indorsement to the death warrant

it will be because it believes the guilt of the defendant has been legally

proven. It will not permit him to go to the gallows unless it is satisfied his

guilt has been established beyond a reasonable doubt.

The first

guarantee of the constitution is that a man shall have a fair trial for his

life. The supreme court must say whether or not Frank has had such a trial. If

he has, the verdict stands. If he has not, and if the verdict is not justified

by the evidence, he is entitled to and he will receive a new trial.

The

proponents and the opponents of Frank may be assured the court will act with

ultimate conscientiousness. In full knowledge that whatever verdict it reaches

will be cited in Georgia for many generations, it could not do otherwise.

All that is asked by

anybodyeverybodyis that absolute justice be done. If Frank is guilty beyond a

reasonable doubt, and it is so proven to the satisfaction of the court, he

should pay the penalty of crime. If not, he should have a new trial. The

supreme court must say!