Show Automobiles Used for Transporting Liquor May MayBe Be Sold Supreme Sold Supreme m Court Forfeiture Opinion Opi Written by Justice r Weber eber and Concurred reT jn in by Three Other Associates l From Fro l Vl Which ch Frick l Dissents Was Vas as Appealed by Ferrand and aol J. of l Morgan n County ol nt r. r HP TRANSPORTATION of liquor In T 1 JL Utah In an automobile or other vehicle renders the tho automobile liable to seizure and confiscation the same S as liquor quor which Is being transported In Jn violation of law This is the opinion of ot the supreme court of ot Utah Ut-nh aa S s set l forth In writing by Justice Al- Al Albert Al Al- bert J. J Weber and concurred in by Justices Thurman Corfman and andI Gideon I eon while o Justice Frick dissents The Time question o of the tho power of or the tho I court to order a a forfeiture of ot an automobile auto- auto mobile while engaged In the tho carrying I. I of liquor is absolute and beyond ques ques- ti tion 0 fl oman Wornon Named d In Cane Cie The case at Issue is that of ot tho the state a against A A. F F. Davis seven hundred bundred hun bun dred and four forty pints of or whisky two yo c cases caes es of ot gin one automobile automobile automo automo- bile and certain other other- pr property un- un un unlawfully unlawfully lawfully use used 1 Mrs drs F. F B. B Ferrand I and Charles Here Hero is t the e dc- dc I S. S SOn On December 12 1918 tIme the sheriff o of Y Weber county count Utah arrested dc- dc de defendant A A. A F F. Davis Dayts who was th then n nIn In char charge o of an aut automobile containing and four forty pints pint of ot whisky and two cases of gin Time The I arrest arrest- Was s a made made in iii hi Morgan co county nt I Thereafter proceedings Instituted tnt tnt- I ed cd to forfeit forrell th the liquor and the te automobile auto auto- uto- uto mobile The automobile w was ws s claimed d I Iby by Mrs F F. B. B Ferrand b by v virtue Irlue c. c oL or a a con contract of pur purchase hase between h her r. r an anthe and l the Paige Sales company compan she having aln purchased the machine o on th the p partial l I I payment pa ment plan pan Charles vine cS also aLsi 1 claimed an an interest In the tho automobile by virtue of or a a. title tills retaining note note I which had been n transferred from rom th the I r Paige Paig lg gales Sal al s company to one N Nv v W I Miller and by Miller to who was the tho owner owr of tI tie e no note e at t th the UI time 10 4 of ot tho the scitt seizure re I Mr h Ferrand ri maintained that If It theu the automobile u e was used s d f for r transporting transporting- liquor It was without her knowledge e eor or consent She testified that the from her machine had been on taken garage In In Ia Salt Lake City during tho her knowledge or nl nighttime without that consent also aho asserted ho he had no knowledge or information of ot the use to which the tho automobile was being put Appealed Prom Front Morgan County Count The case was was- tried in the ti district court of or Morgan county by jury which returned a a as follows 5 e that on the da day orDe ot or De December emb r. r 1 1 iL C I Peterson et r on sherl sheriff of or eber county t State ot of Ut Utah h seized tho the thol 71 l t 1 pints o of whisky and the bottles containing tho the ame oame and ind 24 I quarts ot of l 1 S. n nino G 11 t til Ii in I I I I gin In in t co i u Ltv ioco 1 un n. n v. v I which the ame came was contained and ind described In the he the automobile return of or the ald nid ai H. H C C. Peterson In Inthe inthe inthe the county o of f Morgin and ind State o of Utah and that at It the tho time of said seizure seU- seU and gin were be beIng being be- be nrc ure the wild said whisky ing unlawfully used rind transported In said county count and state tate In violation o of the aw of this state prohibiting tho the thoran transportation ran port use uso O and possession of or intoxicating liquors We the Jury jUr further find that at atthe atthe atthe the time timo o of the seizure t o of said liquors the they were I being heing transported In the thc Ial Paige e automobile described In the re return return return re- re herein and that said turn o of lh the sheriff automobile was as at said I time kept and lI used ell in violation o of the law of oC this timis state prohibiting the transportation intoxicating use and possession of liquors Entered On this verdict a jul Judgment ment of or forfeiture forfeiture for for- was entered b by the court Dc- Dc F F. F n fl Ferrand and Charles lC ne appealed While not controlling tho the principal most moet Important question in this case is whether the d district court had power to lo forfeit the tho automobile which had hall been seized b by the sheriff sherlf says Justice Weber eber The purpose o of time the prohibition lawIs law law- lawIs lawis Is not nol only to ent prevent tho the traffic In 1 liquors but hut also to intoxicating pre pro prevent vent ent transportation and to make the tho state slate what Is termed bone dr dry Comp Compo Laws Utah 1917 1017 Sec 33 says says- E n Ern as us herein pro provided the manufacture ture sale sole Keeping or storing for sale ile ileIn In this state e or offering or exposing e IfOr for sale hale or importing earning carrying transporting trans traits- porting advertising ad distributing giving giving ghIn gh In ing away exchanging dispensing or serving of liquors arc are forever prohibited prohibited pro pro- in this state stale It shall be he un- un 1 wul for or any person ierson within this state knowingly to ha have haC C in iii n his his' or or it Its pos session se any Intoxicating liquors excePt ex except except ex- ex as nb In this title provided pro I I of ot Police Power loner How Hoy enn can the thc objects of or the he law bo be attained and hoW how shall time the law be construed construed con con- of or Utah Uta contain str c Th The statutes the answer Compi Laws Utah 1917 Sec says The revised statutes establish the law of this slate state r respecting respecting respect respect- ing the tho subjects to lo which they relate and their provision pro and amid all proceedings proceedings proceed proceed- ings under them are arc to b bo liberally construed el with a n. view to effect the objects objects ob ob- ob- ob of oC the thc statutes and to lo promo promote e eJu Ju Justice Not ot satisfied with thi thin mandate as to lo lothe the tho construction of or statutes the Le Legislature Legis Legis- is- is lature in the time first firt section of th the pro- pro law la emphasized the subject imperative provision pro by lJ- adopting 1111 this This entire title shall be be deemed Il emd an exercise of ot the tho police powers of oC the tho state for the thc protection o of the public health c c and morals and all of oC Its provisions pro shall be he liberally construed for or the attainment of that p purpose c. c Copy Cop P of Oklahoma The The prohibition prohibition n law Ian JAwor of Utah Is copied to a large extent continues Justl Jus- Jus I tl tier tier- p. p rebur from rom that of ot Oklahoma law w gives gl the sheriff or arrestIng arrestIng arrest arrest- I I In Ing officer power to seize selza liquors without with out warrant arrest arrest- the oUen offender r and seizo all else in connection with w Ith It ft i bar bars vessel etc Tho The compiled l laws Jaws w wo o of Utah provides ldes the lilt snide Remembering bering that thit transportation n of 1 eating liquors I la Is Just au much a n nIola viola viola- i lou of law Jaw as aN the cain sain or poss possession I thereof Sec 1359 supra when applied 1 to Illegal transportation of Intoxicating I ln ing liquor can cah and should bo bu read as follow tollow W en the g l' l transportation p r. r of or I Intoxicating liquor shall hall otc occur In inthe the I presence of ot any any- sheriff constable c. marshal police officer or other rl officer ticer leer having power to serve c criminal Pr proc pro egg ess ess It shall bo be tho the duty of of such officer Officer fl- fl without warrant to to arrest the p of offender pr- pr fonder fender and seize t the e Intoxicating liquors vessels a and d other pr pr property p s so sc unlawfully used in th the thu Illegal trans transportation of ot such Intoxicating Intoxicating- liquors PrIcks PrIck's O Opinion n Justice Iri l Trick k a dissenting opinion in which he analyzes the prohibitory prohibitory pro pro- law and In conclusion say sayI I concur most heartily ar ly In the state state- statement statement state state- ment merit that tho the confiscation of ot automobiles automobiles automobiles automo- automo automo automo- biles when used as a means for tor the un unlawful un- un lawful transportation of intoxicating liquors would go Yer very far in li tI t- t I If It did not entirely l prevent pre tt tile the Il Illicit LI- LI licit traffic in such h liquors r What r Insist upon h however Is ii that the the Leg Lg- Lg and and not the courts Court sh should uld au an- an thorl e their theU I I uri ui hesitatingly agree ree with the proposition proposition tion lion that courts sho should ld not so construe cori- cori con con- truc and antI apply s statutes aut a as tc lIre lIze l- l Ire Ize th them m. m In c connection I j II n to state r ho however v r. r that th courts t ti not well ell devitalize e what never or had Ital it Ity S While f r In my Jud Judgment ment and con lc convictions lo lS prevent t. t m me from concurring will II my lily associates respecting respecting- the right of or f the confiscation tion of oC autom automobiles and nh till other prop property prop prop- crt erty that may be UI used ell as as- asa ls a a. means of transportation o of oC Intoxicating liquors contrary to the pro s o of the act I most cheerfully cheerfull Join them them in in ina a heart hearty pa pax vIn v- v 0 I In In the case of the state against against Hyrum Hy- Hy rum ruin rum Jensen 1 and certain tn h Intoxicating ng I Iono liquors one ono U Hudson automo automobile Q If it n Reilly and 1 F P. P B B. BRyan R Ryan nyan an th I court in an nn o b by Justice u Prick FrIck I the thc he jud Judgment of ot the thc district court of Weber county 1 Is the ors and ind automobile going oln to the time state stat the tho former to be hc destroyed ed and tho latter Ji tor sold Justice Frick dissented from the majority upon th the tho of of the tho courts to a declare forfeiture of or automobiles automobiles auto auto- mobiles s for th the reason stated stated- In tho the dissenting opinion opinion in the case casc sc ft pt o the State vs VB Davis |