The daily dispatch. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1884, 1879-10-04

lowell used the room for when he had it.
| do not know when he left. was never
in it while he was there. was authorized
by the Club to employ ianitor and stew
ard. I have employed a iauitor, but no
steward yet. Ive mixed drinks for mem
bers.
Mr.. Wise: Who is your regular man for
that place?
We have no regular man employed.
Who did it last Sunday?
Mr.. Brewer.
Who did it yesterday?
II any was done yesterday l did it my
self.
The Judge: What were you authorized
to pay steward! q!
Five dollars week.
What were you to pay the ianitor?
Five dollars q month.
Is he there now!
don't know. He may be. If not, ht
will be there some time tomorrow.
What is his name?
Abner; don't know his other name.
Dir. Wise to Mr. Miller Get your min
ute-book.
THE MINUTE-BOoK.
Mr.. Miller produced the minute-book
Many of the records OF meetings simply
stated that list of names for membership
huving been furnished, they were elected
signed by Mr.. Miller as secretary, and Mr.
Dabncy as president. There were no names
Of Notwithstanding but above; except
on September oath (after indictment), when
there was resolution authorizing Mr.. Mil
Ter to employ asteward and ianltor. Mr..
Wise called attention to the fact that these
entries were commenced about the time
that prosecutions were had in this court
against number OF licensed dealers fol
keeping their bars open on Sundays. MI
Miller stated that he had not entered the
names of members because he did not
think it necessary TO go into details.
.fhe minute-book information not being
sufficient. Mr.. Miller was sent back after
tho list of members and other papers, AMI
the case went on. lie was not again pul
upon the stand.
Mr.. Snellins's license to keep a bar was
placed in evidence before the Jury.
FOR THE DEFENCE.
MIR. james L. Apperson was put upon
the stand by defence. He testified that No.
915 Bank street was owned by Mr.. Lucas,
OF Philadelphia, and that he was the agent
of Mr.. Lucas. Mr.. Smelling rents the lower
(street) floor. Up to May 1st Mr.. Smelling
rented the whole house; but now only the
street-foor.
Mr.. Wise: Does the Harmony Club rent
the upper floor?
Mr.. Apperson: Not from me. I only
know from the sign that they occupy the
upper floor.
TO whom did you rent that floor?
To Mr.. Hallowell.
Who is be?
don't know. never saw him.
Can you, Mr.. Apperson, upon your oatt
say that there is any such man as Halo
well?
No, / can't.
How are you paid?
The money is brought to my Office by
gentleman.
His name?
! don't know that. 1t is the same gentle
man through whom rented the MOOR Il
Halowell.
Philadelphia
| Not for this rent.
Mr. Wise: That will do, Mr.. Apperson
THE ARGUMENT.
Mr.. Wise claimed that this was very
different case. from Mr.. krause's. There
was Club there. Here there is none. Th'
charter does not permit any such thing a:
this. And it is a great injustice to licensed
dealers. They can't open on Sundays
This Club" however, pays no license
has no Moffett register, and yet-orSanlzeo
{. to cultivate taste in music c"-can keeI
open seren days in the week! All tht
money goes to Mr.. Smelling. The Mr.. Hal
lowell in Philadelphia he thought pal
pable fraud. Hallowell, in Philadelphia, il
sending down here $50 month to pay thu
rent for Harmony Club! An idiot cout
not be made to believe that. The minute
book does not show how the president ant
secretary were elected. Itdoes not eXhibi
the names Of the members, nor tell wht
proposed their names. The Instalment!
were to be paid how Why, in handing il
the tickets and paying for the drinks. Ant
all the money went to Mr.. Smelling.
! Judge Crump expected the jury to try
the case, not by the hue-and.cry system
but as jury OF God.fearing and man-re
specttng men. He felt no concern Rabou
defending the Club. His duty was t.
defend the accused. What was tn
charge? Why, that Suelling sold in
toxicating liquor on Sunday. Why, th'
words are scarce cold upon the lips o
his Honor, who told you yesterday that tn
Dprson acho sold was responsible. and yo'
Convicted him accordingly. Now, who ha
proved that Smelling sold liquor on Sunday
Who proves that he ever bought or dis
pensed drop of this liquor? Where is III
name. mentioned, except as treasurer ant
as being present in the Club on one occa
sion? The testimony does not incrimi
nate John Smelling. There is not on
seintilla OF proof against him except that b
is treasurer OF the Club, and upon tina
twelve honest and honorable men are eS
peeted to say that he sold liquor on Sunday
We have shown you by the evidence OF MI
Apperson that that upper floor is not unde
control of Mr.. Smelling. His license doe
not cover that upper floor. He nelthe
seated the Club there nor could drive
away. Nowhere is it shown that the accuse
ever derived any benefit from the sale
this liquor, and therefore he held that
would be monstrous to convict this ma
because others. are guilty. He could nc
fight shadows or deal with suspicious 9
truth, aud he relied upon the. good sense
the. Jury to bring in verdict OF "no
guilty.
Mr.. Wise, in bis rejoinder, called the at