OCR Text |
Show DECISION UPSETS PROVO CONVICTIONS Provo, April 12. There was consternation con-sternation among tho city officials of Provo this morning when tho full purport of tho supremo court decision on tho liquor legislation of tho state and cities was read In tho morning papers All of the prosecutions since prohibition went into effect January 1 1910, have been conduced in conformity con-formity with an ordinance passed by the city council of Pioo In October, 190D, and with the revision of tho ordinances or-dinances December 9, 1909, all of whlcli, according to tho supremo court decision, were repealed by implication implica-tion by the Btate law passed by the legislature in March, 1911. Tho more recent prosecutions in this city, or since the commislon superseded the council on January 1 of this year, wero against two druggists, drug-gists, Charles Hedquist and Fred D. Mooro. and Jack Moody, a hack driver. Hedquist and Moore were fined $250 each, which was paid, and Moody was fined $50 and sentenced to serve seventy-five days in the' city Jail. Moody stated today that ho intended consulting an attorney with tho purpose pur-pose of commencing suit for damages for falso Imprisonment. Whenf asked what he intended doing, do-ing, Mooro said: "If tho money is returned to me I believe I will let it go at that, but if the $250 fino paid by mo it not forthcoming forth-coming J will consult my attorney and proceed as ho adlsc3 me." City Attorney Andrew Morgan says the cases prosecuted wero all under the city ordinance, which the supreme court has ruled invalid, but Mr. Morgan Mor-gan adds: "The city is safe, we are safe. If we have to return tho money collected collect-ed in fines the cases will be taken up again under tho state law." Under the decision of tho supreme court, whorein the court refers to the question as to whether tho cities can pass and enforce such ordinances, Mr. Morgan is in grae doubts, and says: "Heaven only knows what tho state law means, T don'L" |