The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-07-30

|
sdnce the 4th; asksd for It myself; have drank
dozen tines A. What did You ssk iori (ObJectsd
to end exceptions taken) A. l asked for pop
pretty nearly ~ the time p: dsss not keep much
bttters; think drank Q glass Of brandy once on
the Saturday evening aftsr the 4:h; ! did mot pay
for at the time, and have rot paid for it YETI have
paid for the other drinks; when called for bsters,
asked for fever and aeue btters; don't kooW aay-
thing further about bitters.
CnMexamined-Took the brandy for msdi final
Saturday evening, when fel. pretty bad with the
darrtGa. and Mr. Lancashire told me to 20 in,0 Nj.
Jam'escL's, ard l wcuid get somstbing that would
help me.
frederick Lar cashire sworn-I reside In Fult1n
street, Astoria ave been In Mr.. Jamieson's store
sir &c the 4th Of July; have been In there q
Der Of times; have drank different things there. Q.
Did you drI k intoxicating liquors there?
Witnets.i woud ask the Court II | an DOM oeled
to answer this question.
Court On what grounds do you decline to an,
swer?
witnsw-It may tend (, degrade or ciimna.e
me. md II juie me In my business.
Here q discussion aJote between the counsel on
both .ides, at the conclusion Of which ths Court
Ius II At II the Siness believed II would tend to
degrade hin, or IL he belle we'd 1t would ted :, cdmi
conmittal In default tina. the witness had perfect
| rghr to decline ans serirg the question, parsicu.
larry a. the witness thought it might have that
efec..
Mr.. James Pnrdy was recalled to prove that Mr..
Lam sshie one Of thu patty he 80 through the
stove pipe toe aekirg for brandy. H. wAs cross
txaml ed at some Ter gth, but Of his kno Wedge
Petsick Sullivan. beiog sworn, deposed tina. he
resiced in Aatoris knew M. Jameson, but hal NOT
bten In bis store since tbs 4th OF July.
Henry Shay being duly sworn deposei that he
was col stable Of = q town o. Astoria; toe war
rants In ibis case we're put into my haais for exs
cutcp; 2. Under the search warrant wha; did yo1
COT (Obje ted, the Law presumirg be did his duty)
Q What old you seize? OBJECTED to ~ rrslevant.)
Have you been in Mr.. Jam,eson's pla,.2 A. Was
there y sterday t. get cigar; was ths.e when
mazda Tie seizure. Q. VIVA. liquors did YOU fad2
Collected to, on tho ground that tho tffsacs had
bt en- Committed previous 10 the issuing OF the war
rat fer toe seizure. Objection overrued)
Wtnsss-I found some brandy aad 80 No gin in
kegs al dtmijohDs; l als0 foucd soma bit.ers
bral dy ingredient. Of the bitsrs; found The
mtst OF II down In The cellar; don't kno Y that IL
was IN ported liqu 7; could not tell BY ths smell Of
"; am judge Of liquor; made the seizure right
| away after getting the warrant shIch aas In the
neiebboi b. cd Of IiI a or ten o'clock
i was irnported liquo 20 bjected to, aud objec
tlon sustaired) @ Did you lake the bittersl A.
Do u mean 70 say drank it?
WitIess--Y Yes, I seized the histera. Q. D ,e4 he
keep vegetables for ssl.l A. Yes. @. Did you ses
some biteIs partly mulled, OF being prepa!ecl A.
MIS-. McCisue = orn--Q What's your pame2 A.
Csthaline. Q D, you know tbs defendant, Mr.
Jameson? A. 20 he sure do; he WAS my nsx;
door Ieighbcr since came to the country. @ Have
GU been In il shop since the 4th Of jay? A.
Have ], yes, ard in many shop besides; sue ws
can't live with ut going into the shops. Q Have
ycu Bought sry liquor Ia nia shop since tae "A OF
JuyI A. No, sif; but my old u.an woo IS q
wry hard working person, bad to have these
bitess | Lever knew what he paid fW
the b,ie:s, as he paid fer The stuff b,mssif.
guefs / got b,tfe's tbree times O. rla.Is che oaly
Iquor ytu bought there 8 III A. Y's, SIR.
Cross Dii youeys see "A info'mer
ayouL62 A. hsd no idea that the likes VAS Ia sne
neighboshoci; never minded whether thors were
spNs ar, unc or MT.
AIuUhr CT wtnt woro bore called by the
tonLf.l for The ferce. for tie purpose Of testing
the v.rscty OF Purcy's evi,eBce, Bat the Court
ctc.dtd that the counsel could no; g any further
than TO show the general chsract r Of the witness.
Mr.. t. minson also moved tina, Jastics Boyd him
sslf should be placed upon the stand TO tertfy -
the character Of Mr.. Pa cy for veraclty. but the
Justice declined the ordeal unless the proce sdngs
were removed to some other court.
Charles Mcczs befog sworn depossd that hs re-
s,dtd in Astoria; knew the witness. III. Pardy; did
feel considerable difidence In tsstying 70 aoythipg
about Mr.. Purdys character; what be did koow OF
him mace him doubtful OF bis veracity, I, say the
leest Of IT.
Jami, SOD; have heard tell Of his msklg b tiers; took
The by order of the doctor, ard they did good.
O. Do you know OF his getting foreign liquors
the 3, ound tba.ths p:onbitorS &C STAYED iatoxo,t
ing liquor. ard It was no matter whether the liquor
was foleisn.r domestic)
.. ,sbis. the sse i imootssd
LIQUORS, ard that II was tor the prosecution to
prossthst the liquors were domestic: He cited the
opioion OF coder Smith Of this city. IN the Gao
Tie Court vas cf opinion that the defence WAS
not ew obliged TO prove that the liquor vas i'm
poltd, sDd hat It was Incumbent entirely on the
to prove sh' domestic nature OF the ar
This rclpded tho testimony in toe case.
Mr.. Tompson proceeded to sum up. He touched
"a tone m In ASA IN 4 nj tn
ticpsty cf the law He also advsrted to tie method
The prose-! a opted in t,ump!ng uo evi
sd sS' no &C.
He also commended that law which was partial
! IN i's workings was uncoussi'u ional. This fact
the law ~ a. toe 3
7 pit been attempted IN this case to prove that the
! liquor sold was Of domestic manufacture. Tne
qua sion they were now tes log was not on, Of
temperance aud intemperance but Of desp0tsrn on
, he oIe hand, and freedom on tho other. He cen.
clueed BY hoping thst'the jury would ssqni; the
Mr.. o ven followed. He consended that the law
beirg constitutional, 1t was not within the pro
vince 81 the jury TO pass judg men; upon it, He
argued thot II 1t was proven that liquor had
bse, sold by tie defer dant, they must bring in q
verdict Of guilty.
THE CHARGE.
Justice SBediker INSIDE the charge to the Jury.
reates to tie aalo II imported liquor he said III AZ
that provision OF the law when permitted the i'm
porting OF liquor CERTAINLY meant sorethiDg or
nothing II there vas TO be an exception In favor
OF any liquor, II obvious that |: NUT apply TO
imported liquor II the law was render ID ino para
tive through tina section of tho act, the he
had 70 make - this was we we're net &C ,ount
able for the hnni e.s Of toe Lsgslsture. II they
have tnacted law inter ded TO suppress the traffic
IN intoxicating liquor, ard inserted provision that
renders the law v,j not the fault Of ths Curt
who are called upon 70 enforce It, II IL should be
iau; 0, but the fau OF the Legislature. He there
ioie held and charged the jury that II the evi
dtnce ado uced went to show that the liquor
cod II any, was domestic, they must find TIE
dant guilty. II was for the jury tosay whether
tho evidence they had listened % was suffl ,iently
stror to convict Mr. ia zieAen Of sci ing dom sstc
liquor In the abs nee Of this proof the defendant
| entitf Il IN arnriktal Tho only nu.aN,a r.