The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1873-01-15
Superior Court.

JANUARY CRIMINAL TERM, BEFORE JUDGE sY-
MoNDs.
TUEsDAY.-John F. Haines was fined $50 and costs
for gambling. Paid.
William Smith was arraigned on an indictment
charging him with the larceny of an belong
ing to Mr.. Ira William, from the counting room of
the Argus. Pleaded guilty, and was sentenced to
three months in the County Jail.
The Grand Jury reported finally and were dis
charged.
Among the indictments returned was one against
Hon. William L. Putnam, James McGlinchy, Charles
H. Hall, Francis Hoffman and John H. McCue, for
conspiracy in maciously and wrongfully taking Ii
quors valued at it is said about $1,000 from the pos
session of Deputy Sheriff Adams, the same being held
by him on process for search and seizure.
At the coming in of the Court this afternoon Mr.
Putnam arose and said:
Nay it please your Honor-There has been an in
dictment returned against here which, as it not
only cotains charges OF violation of the criminal law
but, If the conclusions of law aegedn it correct
involves breach of my oath and duty As mem
Der of this court feel it is a matter about which
GU ht to be allowed to say word to the court.
informed some weeks ago that the late Sheriff of
this county intended to procee with this indictment
ag inst me, and have reasons to believe that in this
aud other matters he has been governed by violent
personal hostility growing out of which personal
res man{ nays Osaaea
nave heretofore taken no notice, believing that the
questions involved III the case were proper for the
courts Of law and nowhere else. But feel that
ought to guard myself against any possible porte
statement going out in connection with this indict-
Iment and desire to say, only that in whatever
have done have done what 1 conceived my con-
scientious duty as a counsellor of this court 1 am
advised that the questions raised by this Indictment
and the question whether have done my duty, are
merely questions Of law, and ii So shall continue
OF the opinion that have thus done conscientious
duty until the Supreme Court of this State otherwise
decides. Anu If the Supreme Court of this State
should perchance decide chat had violated my duty
while should still remain of the same conviction
will give Mr.. Perry the satisfac ion of knowing that
he will have succeeded in planting sting in me
which time can never cut out. Que thing further.
The person who has instituted this indictment
slider the most feared, and justly the hated man
in the County of Cumberland, but say to him. and
to all Others that no system of threats nimdations
nor even an Indictment. will prevent any member of
the Cumberland Bar from doing what he considers
his conscientious duty by his clients.
County Attorney NIattocks then rose aud spoke as
follows, though not in the exact language:
Nay q bteGse yonr Homo In regard to the mat
ter of Ibis indictment do not believe that there was
any feeling on the part of the Grand Jury. as know
there was none on my own part against Mr.. Putnam.
He then quoted the words of the statute stating that
when liquors have been seized by the officers Of the
law they should not be taken away by writ of replev
in. In the framing OF this Indictment he had pur-
p0sey abstaned from inserting that the liquors in
question had been taken, any course pursued, 9TH
er than such as violated the technical form of the
statute He then referred the of the steamer
Victoria, where the owner was indicted for stealing
his own steamer with the keeper on board Thec0
sci in that case-Ntr. Putnam -c9ntendel that the
man had only taken his own, and therefore had COM
mitted no crime, yet the man was convicted the
Court deciding that after the property had been seiz
ed by law the owner had no more right to take it
than he had TO seize any other property of another
PERSONS. He considered The cases analogous, and
wished COUNSEL RS to understand that they must
abide by the statutes. If this statute unconst-
tutional well; but till it is proved so it abidcs on the
statute books and must be enforced. Until this in
dictment was found m ny believed that Sheriff Perry
mad been bribe to allow these liquors to be repeved.
In conclusion he would say that the distinguished
Indictment was of the last on the Docket it had
been set down for Tomorrow morning.
Mr.. Putnam then said he had no feelings but the
was the case with the County Attorney towards him
self.
The Court then sad ~ do not perceive that the
remarks which have been made by counsel call direct
ly for any response from the Court. In accordance
with the request of Mr. Putnam, early day will be
assigned for the trial of the case to which reference
has been made but the merits of it are not issue
now.'
The case will probably be tried Thursday next Ma
than Webb and Sewall c. Strout are counsel for th'
respondents.
The Indictment CONTAINS six counts and oceuple
thirty-tbree closely written foolscap pages.
State VS.. Samuel w. Chadbourn. Respondent wa
indicted at May term Of this Court in 1872, for EN-
bezzling the estate of Emma j. Russell, of whom Ii
was guardian. On trial. Argument for responder
finished.
Mattocks, County Attorney.
A. A. Strout for respondent.