Eastern times. [volume] (Bath, Me.) 1846-1857, 1854-02-16
Liquor Case Decided.

An important case was decided in the Su-
Prome Judicial Court at Bangor last week.
We copy the following report of the case from
the Bangor Mercury -
The Court has been occupied for several
days in the trial of an action Of Rufus K .
Paige, Thomas b.. Sanford and others, own
ers Of the steamer Boston, against TheOphilus
Gushing, Esq, William l., Chase, Jos. p
Hardy, Archibald Jones, Esq, Rev. Reuben
A. Curtis and Rev. Stephen Hayes, all of
Frankfort, for illegally and malicousIy con-
spring together on the fourth Of December,
1851, to injure and break up the lawful tusi-
ness of said steamer as a common carrier in
the town of Frankfort.
| The origin of this case is well understood
here, and was an exciting topic at the time of
its occurrence. The defendants, with the ex-
ception of Jones, were the complainants upon
whose oaths Jones granted warrant to search
and take out freight from the steamer Boston.
The attempt was resisted, and the officer,
Deputy Sheriff Staples and Chase, one of the
defendants, were injured.
| MANY witnesses we're examined and the
cause was ably conducted BY Messrs George
| Evans, Rowe g. Bartlett for the Plaintiffs, and
| Webster Kelley and A. w. Paine for the
Defendants The argument of Mr.. Evans
was an able exposition of the law and the facts
in the case, and the points were set out with
great clearness, directness and force. The
court room was thronged during its delivery.
Counsel stated that the plaintiffs did not ex-
pect or desire exemplary damages. The suit
was rather to test the question of their rights
as common carriers.
| The instructions of the Court to the jury
were mainly in accordance with the points
made by the counsel for the plaintffs-that
the steamer was engaged in lawful business
as a common carrier and to be protected as
such. That packages OF spirituous liquors on
freight were to be considered as any other ar
ticles of freight, and could not be taken before
deliUery By any such process as tcGS granted
| That the combination of the defendants for
the purpose of sezing freight from the steamer
seemed apparent-that such combination or
conspiracy being for an illegal purpose, was
unlawful-that malice might be inferred If the
defendants had no probable cause for making
the complaint upon which the warrant was is
sued. 1t was in evidence that the defendants
made cath to the complaint, alleging that they
had reason to believe. and did believe that
Capt. Sanford had liquors on board the steam
er Boston, then lying in the town Of Frankfort
and intended for sale in said town, an hour or
two before the steamer arrived.
The case went to the jury yesterday after
noon, who in an hour returned verdict for
the plaintiffs for $25, carrying costs.
Temperance men of high strung nerves
went for enforcing the liquor law with ven
gence when it first went into operation. All
who counselled prudence and caution, were
stigmatised as g rummies'' This Frankfort
affair was trumpeted as an evidence that the
people desired the enforcement Of the law, and
the officers of the boat were mercilessly han
died, by temperance presses for resisting the
officers. Now, an impartial jury decides
against what was considered law in those days.
About that time vessel on Kennebec waters,
at Hallowell, we believe, was searched by the
officers Of the law and liquor actually taken
out of the hold, and spilled in the street. The
captain Of the vessel compromised the matter
and it was understood carried the remainder
of the liquor on board back to Boston. ltwas
supposed suit for damages would be COM
menced in that case.