Grant v. Owens

• Decision Date: 25 October 1891
• Citation: 17 S.W. 338
• Parties: GRANT v. OWENS <I>et al.</I>
• Court: Arkansas Supreme Court

Page 338

17 S.W. 338

GRANT v. OWENS et al.

Supreme Court of Arkansas.

October 25, 1891.

Appeal from circuit court, Phillips county; MATTHEW T. SANDERS, Judge.

Action by H. P. Grant against F. M. Owens and others on a bond given by defendants for said Owens as the keeper of a dram-shop. Judgment for defendants. Plaintiff appeals. Affirmed.

U. M. & G. B. Rose and James P. Clarke, for appellant. Stephenson & Trieber and Quarles & Moore, for appellees.

HUGHES, J.

On the 7th day of May, 1890, the appellant filed his complaint at law in the court below, in which he alleged that on the 3d day of May, 1890, he was postmaster at Helena, in this state, having for his assistant postmaster one W. B. Lindsey, who was duly qualified as such; that in the course of the discharge of his official duties there came into the possession of Lindsey a large sum of money, of which he embezzled and converted to his own use the sum of $8,000, which plaintiff was liable to pay over to the United States; that the defendant Owens had been from the 1st day of January, 1890, a keeper of a licensed saloon and dram-shop in Helena, and that in connection with the keeping of same, and in rooms connected therewith and under his control, Owens set up and exhibited various gambling devices, to which numerous persons habitually resorted, with his knowledge, consent, and procurement, for the purpose of gaming, and did then and there actually engage in gaming with his consent and procurement; that among these was said Lindsey, during the time that he was assistant postmaster, as Owens well knew; and that Lindsey at divers times between the 1st day of January and the 3d day of May did, of the money coming to his possession as aforesaid, bet and lose the sum of $5,000 on said gaming devices thus carried on by said Owens at his said rooms; that said Lindsey was wholly insolvent, and had absconded, and that the plaintiff had been compelled to account for the sum thus embezzled, including the sum bet and lost as aforesaid; that at the time a license was issued to Owens to keep his dram-shop, as a condition thereof, he executed a bond in accordance with the statutes in such cases made and provided, with the other two defendants as sureties, conditioned according to law, a copy of which was annexed as an exhibit to the complaint. Plaintiff prayed judgment against the defendants for the amount of the penalty of the bond under section 4516, Mansf. Dig. Ark., and for the further sum of $3,000...