The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1868-12-15
NEW YORK CITY.
s,rrp STATES DISTRICT COURT.
The Watson & Crazy Distillcry Case.
Before Judge Biatchford.

Watson
Before Judge Biatchiord.
Tns limited states u.s. The RsctJping Distalery III,
TIA ana IT'S christopher street.-1hs Is branch OF
The case OF the United States $500 barrels OF ds
ur,eA sn,rits for which Nessrs Watson 4 Crary,
disslers were claimants and the trial Of which
having commenced on Monday, the It'll inst, was
NOT closed TIL the Friday morning following result
ing In the condemnation Of the property seized by
the verdict directed to be rendered by the Court
70 that effect. The trial commenced yesterday Is
for the condemnation OF the premises III. 17s and
l75 Christopher street. which the $500 barrels of
EhisKey were seized and other personal properly.
It presents somewhat different aspec. as regards
the Internal Revenue law, or rather to the provi-
s0ns Of that law, presented by counsel on either
side In the former case, the main points OF which
were reported in the HERALD at the opening
addresses by counsel anu as they arose from tlne
TO time during the examination OF the Witnesses.
, There was considerable delay In interrogatng the
panel Of Jurors TO the business OF each juror his
knowledge OF the claimants his acquaintance with
the case and "a to any Impressions he might have
from the previous trial. Only four jurors were re-
Counsel for the government, United States District
Attorney Courtney and General Hubbard; for the
claimants, Messrs Henry L. Clinton and J. 3. Bull
lock-
General Hubbard, for the government, opened the
case he said this action was brought for the for
lecture OF the rectifng establishment Ill, ia aud
IT'S Christopher street, for which Messrs Watson
all the properly found therein, enumerated 1ol-
iows:-Twenty leach tubs. two receiving cisterns
one alcohol STILL one rum still, two empty tubs one
force pump three large receivers aud otaer tools and
implements ana quantity OF spirits belonging to
rectifying distillery. The government claims that
this property was legally forfeited because tue
parties owning 1t at the time did not make
entries thereof In book called recihers book,
they being rectiners, and which they were by law
compelled to keep for the purpose OF making such
entries. 1t IL also claimed by the government that
Messrs. Watson Il Crazy, the Claimants, intended
IN inr kaau q Ds
posed OF used by them, contrary to law This pro-
perry. As It appeared some OF the Jurors on the pre-
vious trial had misunderstood the position OF the
government he (counsel) would explain that they
were not proceeding on merely technical grounds
alone Thought it might seem that portions OF
the act were technical and III some instances harsh.
BY the provisions OF the Internal Revenue law
government Is empowered TO seize certain pro-
Or showing that any offence was committed
with regard to this particular property, the
subject Of the suit. The governme charged IN
she previous case Iat the spirits seized on the pre-
misses on Christopher street referred TO had not
paid the tax and that 1t was he'd by those parties
TO be sold or disposed Of by Them and that there
fore, according to law, they should be forfeited.
Perhaps 1t may not be 80 obl tnat any property
should be forfeited because The owners thereof did
not make certain entries IN book OF other property
The government now claims tile forfeiture OF this
property because Wa son Il Crary, who claim IL as
owners, had not made certain entries as rectiners
In reCtying book Us prescribed or directed by law.
Counsel hen read the twenty-sixtn section Of the
Internal Revenue law OF July 81 1865 applicable to
this case, and c0nnued:Tnese entries That the law
requires to be made are to be made for certain pur-
poses and The first Is thai every rectiler person
who compounds spirits and prepares 1t for the mar
ket Ii required To pay rectiying tax upon It. The
amount OF the tax proportoned TO The quantity OF
spirits rectified and therefore 1t is necessary, 10
enable the government To ascertain II the
tax is paid on this spirits. 10 know how
ceiyes and to this end that he should make entries IN
the book, it is most important to the government
rigidly enforced inasniuch as the government does
not impose payment OF the tax upon the spirits till
It has been prepared and put into the market Tor
consumption. And to enable the government to trace
IL from the place Of dstiliation TILL the time when
the tax Of two dollars ought TO DC paid upon it The
rectner IL required by law to make entries In book
Of the quantity Of spritls received, the time he
ceived 1t and nom whom he received It. For vIo-
lation Of this law penalty Is imposed. To make
out this branch OF the case We snail prove that
certain spirits went TO the recsiiying place Of
Watson a Crary and that no enlry Of IL was
and II we do that claim verdict at your hands,
the law declaring that not only shau the particular
goods themselves be forfeited but all other property
found on the premises shall likewise be seized and
forfeited.
Burr Porter was the first witness examined by Mr.
COURTNEY United states District Attorney-0n tho
Nth February was an inspector OF internal revenue
and deputy collector Of the sixth district; the day
Bailey seized the premises II watson 4 Crazy rect
lying dstiers iii, ls3 and l76 christopher street;
seTs tonnS on he "n sa
immediately after the seizure, caused an inventory
to be taken Of ali the goods seized.
all the articles seized.
Book handed to witness-This Is the rectifying
book which found ON the premises ana took posses
sion OF.
Cross-examned by Mr.. Clinton--Did not make the
whole OF the inventory; made portion OF IL; did not
See any OF the articles enumerated written down on
the list or inventory on my return after short alb
sence saw paper with the entries made thereon.
James h. Sowder examined-In February last
was in the employ OF Collector Bailey went to the
premises In Christopher street with Mr.. Porter
the i4th OF February; the rectifyng premises were
at that time seized; received instructions mme-
niately after the seizure TO make an inventory OF
everything on the premises; first took list Of the
articles In small book.
Book produced-The entries here were made by
hin (wtness IL was from the book entries that the
inventory was subsequently made at Mr.. Baileys
Office; the inventory shows the full list OF goods
sezed al Watson a Crary's on that occasion.
Several OF the witnesses in the whiskey
examined, whose testimony was similar to that pre-
yonsy given by them.
Two other witnesses not previously examined
were called on the part OF the government, but
neither their direct evidence nor that given on
crossexaninaton added a new feature to the case;
the evidence which condemned In one case being
thought 40 far as the Internal Revenue law Is
cerned, sufficient for verdict for the government
IN the one ON trial
The case Will be resumed this morning.