No Cause For Action

NO CAUSE FOR ACTION

Saloon Keeper Does Not Run a Public House.

CAN ORDER OUT PERSONS

And if they Don't go Out He Can Use Reasonable Force to Oust Them.

The case of Dixon Burchard vs. Michael Hochradel and Bartender Holcomb, was finished yesterday morning. This is the Milan case where Burchard, a cripple, claims to have been thrown or dragged out of Hochradels' saloon without provocation. The defense was that when Burchard and Holcomb became involved in a dispute, Burchard called the latter a liar and became noisy, whereupon Holcomb ordered him out, Burchard resisted and Holcomb put him out. It was undisputed that Hochradel, the proprietor, was in Ann Arbor, on the day of the occurrence.

Judge Kinne charged the jury substantially as follows: "If you find that Mr. Holcomb is not guilty, then Mr. Hochradel is not guilty also. But if Holcomb is guilty, then it becomes a question whether or not Hochradel is also. If it was only a personal quarrel between Burchard and Holcomb, and independent of any business, then the employer is not guilty. If it was done in the line of employment, and if Holcomb had no ill-will, Hochradel is guilty if Holcomb is."

"A saloon, while it is public in a qualified sense, is a private business. The public has the right to enter and may remain there, until requested to leave by those in charge of the place. A man in charge of a saloon has the right to discriminate as to those with he desires to do business. Parties have no right to become disorderly. If they become noisy or boisterous, then the person in charge can demand that he leave, and if he refuses, he can use force to put him out. If Burchard called Holcomb bad names, that would not justify an assault but if he became abusive, then Holcomb could order him out, and if he did not go, he could use force, but not more than is reasonably necessary. A saloon keeper, or those in charge have the right to maintain order in their places of business." 

The jury retired about 10:30 o'clock and as soon as they had their dinner served, they brought in a verdict of "no cause for action."

The result of the verdict is due to the careful preparation and handling of the case by Attorneys John P. Kirk and William Murray. Mr. Kirk made a particularly strong argument to the jury which under the charge of the court could not be otherwise than convincing.

Attorneys Lehman & Stivers both made strong pleas for the plaintiff.

————

C. F. Staebler, clerk of Ann Arbor township, will be at the county treasurer's office in the court house Saturday, Dec. 9, until 4 p. m., to receive woodchuck scalps and sparrow heads and give bounty order for the same.