The Middlebury register. [volume] (Middlebury, Vt.) 1850-1882, 1871-10-10

words seem to be called for in regard to
tho article that appeared in last weeks
KEGisTER on the above subject, for the
purpose of giving the pubIca just idea
of the facts Of the case. Promising in
the first place. that it ~ not claimed that
the Riptcn people are perfect in any re-
spect.
On the trial of Mr.. A. e.. Chandler,
for selling Intoxicating liquor, few
curious ideas and rulings on law points
now brought to light. The declaration
states that he had "sod intoxicating IL
quors without license" without naming
cider in the list, but on trial the evidence
introduced by the state showed in the
main that it was cider that was Sold and
in fact Chandler admitted that he had
sold that article, but claimed that it was
not intoxicating and of all the witnesses
examined no one with one exception
testified that he got drunk on it, or knew
OF any one in that condition from it, One
witness swore that he b ught cider and
got drunk on the sane, but when Chand-
Ter offered evidence to show that this
person stole the cider when partially in
toxicated on whiskey, it was ruled out as
inadmissible. Another witness states
that he saw him sell cider brandy to one
Hale, and this is the only case claimed of
his selling cider brandy which Chandler
denied, and tried to introduce Hale to
rebut the statement but was ruled out
Quite number of witnesses testified
to purchasing bitters and that Chandler
either said they were good whiskey," or
contained good whiskey;" but no one
said he got drunk on the article, while the
assumption that they were whiskcy bitters
remained to be proved, which they did
not attempt to do in regard to the "whs-
key straight" so that is gratuitous stab
in the dark. Considerable ingenuity was
exercised on the part of the counsel to
show by some witness that they or some
one else, did get too many bricks in his
hat, but, without avail, of course with the
exception mentioned. Though to bring
out the facts His Honor ruled and proper
ly too, that prosecution for being drunk
must commence within thirty days of the
date Of the offense and here let me say,
no one charged Chandler with selling since
the last of July 1871. Now, what was
the class of persons that were and are
witnesses ? Were they the reliable, law
abiding citizens of the town, or we're they
the ones that would evade or break the
law if their inclinations called that way ?
will allow every one to form their
own opinion, and will simply state
that the majority of them were members
of the Ripton Lodge |. o. of G.. T. who
had pledged their word of honor to avoid
these beverages in toto, but here they
swore that they bought and also drank Of
the cup that makes men brutes.
A share of the witnesses admitted feel
ings of personal animosity against Chand.
Ter.
There is curious circumstance con-
nected with this matter, when Judge
Slade came to charge the jury, he said in
substance if not in words, "if you find the
respondent guilty, bring him in so, and
leave the rest to the court | will see to
the hhe." Are not the jury judges of the
law and evidence, or am | wrong?
There is another phase of the matter
to be examined. An indirect back hand
ed slur is thrown to the Rev. DR.. Powers
as though he was the sole author Of the
verdict. Does one man, or six make up
verdict? But to cnlighten the gentle
men, | will say, when the jury first bal
loted it stood five not guilty to one guilty
and that one was DR.. who after reviewing
the evidence changed his mind.
One thing more and | am done If Mr..
Clark knew that two of the Jurors were
anxious to have Chandler prosecuted, he
is not the straightforward gentleman he
is generally supposed to be, but | am of
opinion that your correspondent is in "A
grevious error on that point for Ripton-
ians generally think him to be that rare
avis-an honest lawyer, as also they think
concerning Judge Sade, but, they do
think that in this particular case, he did
make few mistakes which the most per-
feet men are liable to do at some period
of their life.
The above is, | believe, if my inform.
ant is correct, fair statement of the case
and there is no question in my mind but
what Chandler would have been fined, if
he had been prosecuted for selling cider
for too much Of it has been sold for the
welfare of the community. Il.
Our correspondent is mistaken in sup
posing that it is necessary to designate
in the complaint, the kind Of liquor sold.
Cider is recognized by the statute as in
toxicating liquor, equally with whiskey.
If proved that it had not intoxicating
qualities, the action could not be sustain
ed. Otherwise the inference in law is,
that cider is intoxicating liquor. The in
formation on which the statement of the
case made in our last issue, was based was
obtained from official sources and seemed
to be correct. Wegive place to the above,
however, in order to food the subject on
all sides with light.
Probate COurt-- District OF Addison.
Hon. S. f. Cooke, Judge