Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1879-01-04
Local ann State Mus.

Mr. EprroR Without any desire TO be-
come party to the controversy going on in
the columns of the city press, I do wish to
saw one word concerning the case Of State
VS.. Tilson, tried at the present term of the
Superior court. Is it requiring too much of
a man who sets himself up as reviewing
authority in matters of law, to demand that
he state facts, and that he shall acquaint him
self with the subjects he presumes to discussy
If &C. H." had taken pains to do either
rather il he had not been at the trouble to
avoid both. the public would have had better
opportunity to Judge of the merits Of the case
alluded TO.
Charles Tison was tried on an indictment
charging him with selling boy a glass of
| hger beer. Tilson did not denv selling beer;
he did deny selling lager beer Three entirely
di~interested witnesses corroborated Tison's
statement. that the youth called for beer.-not
! lager beer. Tilson swore that he gave him a
home made cream beer. manufactured from
formula furnished him by one Worthley of
| Augusta. Worthlev testified that he had
made beer from the same recipe and sold 1t.
and that he gave the recipe to Tilson. One
/ Paine also testified to making beer from the
same recipe. Testimony was excluded, as
immateral. going to show that this beer had
been freely sold in various places for a long
time and that no one had ever even pretend
ed to claim any intoxicating properties for it.
The witness. Hitchings, of Waterville, is n
regularly and duly commissioned State As
saver and a thoroughly competent chemist :;
he was entirely dsintercsted, his testimony
was that of an expert, and was like that Of
other Witnesses under oath, and he stated on
the stand that he had analyzed the beer in
question. and found it contained 34-l00 per
cent. of alcohol and further testified that re-
peated analyses showed lager beer to con-
tain from TO per cent. alcohol.
&C. H." tells us Mr.. Hitchings testified
that the beer sold by Tilson contained 81 per
cent. Was it a difficult matter for &C. H."
TO state the truth in this connection?
! The Court DID NOT ''instruct the jury that
if the beer contained any Intoxicating eie-
ment the defendant would be guilty, if the
jury found he sold it,"
Either this statement is deliberate false
hood on the part of &C. H." or else. which
is nearly as culpable, he makes assertions af-
fecting the character and integrity of twelve
of his fellow citizens. without any foundation
whatever for such assertions, and without
any knowledge of the subject he essays to
discuss in the public press.
Judge Whtehouse was selected for the
| high position he now occupies because he
was deemed eminenty fitted by his thorough
training, legal requirements excellent judy
ment, and good, solid. practical common
sense withal. to discharge the responsible du-
ties devolved upon him, and he would hardly
be found making ruling which he. in com
mon with every attorney at the bar in this or
any other State well knows would be overruled
the moment it reached the Law Court.
The whole matter was one of facts for the
consideration of the jury, and it is to be pre-
snmed that twelve men. acting under a SOL
emn oath to find a verdict in accordance
with the law and facts. did so find, and ne-
| ther sc. H." nor any other busy body
has any legal or moral right to impugn either
their honesty or their judgment. The jury
din not Enquire how much of this beer a
boy could drink without being made drunk,
becoming brute" The question did not
come before them. Yes. the jury did acquit,
and now this Scion, this wiser than Solo
mon this great expounder of the law, under
takes. through the press. to instruct Judge,
jury. attorneys, and our citizens at large as
to the proper meaning of the statutes, the
correct Interpretation Of the law, and their
respective duties and how to properly perform
them. venture the surmise that each of
the twelve men who tried that case appre-
hended quite as clearly as &C. H." the .'real
issue in liquor case" and so experimenting,
further venture to suggest that they per-
formed their sworn duty in the case under
considerations quite as honestly as faithfully,
as intelligently, as &C. H." could have done,
and Judging from his exhibition of passion
and prejudice--a good deal more fairly and
impartially.
1t is useless to attempt to follow &c. H."
through all his devious wanderings from
truth and the facts. 1t would take more
time than I can give and more space
than you can afford to correct his blunders,
Cor his misrepresentation and leave the
subject here. JusTrrA.