Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1883-05-24
A MhiskeY War.

1t is well known that Lancaster has a
black list. 1t is also well known that
this list is composed of names of such
parties as the common council deem it
wise shall be sold no liquor by dealers
in this city. For some time past there
have been lapses from virtue on the
part of the members of this prescribed
fraternity which, under the prevailing
rules, were unaccountable, except upon
the hypothesis that liquor was being
supplied to them surreptitiously. Act
ing upon this hypothesis, the common
council set themselves to work to dis
cover the illicit vendors. AS result of
these efforts, last Friday afternoon, d.
F., or .'Mont.,' Smith swore out a
complaint against Geo Mckinney,
charging him with having furnished one
James Levins with bottle of whiskey,
which had been bought by Kinney from
Henkel & Wenzel, ostensibly for the
purpose of bathing sore foot. All of
this was not included in the warrant,
but came out in the account of the af-
fair gathered afterwards. From Smiths
statement it appears that Kinney, after
purchasing the liquor. took himself to
Green's livery stable, where, after
short wait, he met Levins and gave him
the bottle. This part of the transaction
was witnessed by Smith, from the back
ground, who then went and swore out
the complaint as above stated.
Kinney, on his part, denied the charge
in toto, alleging that Smiths statements
were of an extremely gauzy nature,
while his word would not be accepted
by those more intimately acquainted
with him, under oath. The accused
party even went further, and said that
if he was guilty he ought ito be sent
up," and other assertions to that effect.
On this point, however, the testimony
of James Levins. the party alleged to
have been supplied, appeared necessary,
anu lIC W dS dllCSbtu ~
an examination before Justice Baldwin,
he made the following sworn statement:
State of Wis.
VS..
James Leyins, Def't.
| | am the defendant in this action. l
was intoxicated on the 18th of May,
1888, in Grant county. / drank whiskey
l on. hot n MaI< InlixraraI
pint of whskey to me on that day.
He gave me the whiskey and promised
to pay him for it sometime.
JAMES LEvINs.
This was the sworn testimony OF
Levins before the Justice and would APP
pear to be reasonably conclusive.
The trial was first set for Saturday
morning at nine o'clock, but it was adj
journed again until one o'clock in the
afternoon, when an interested audience
| gathered TO listen to the crumbs of wis
dom and evidence which were expected
TO be dropped. The lively anticipa-
tons were, however, doomed TO disap-
pointment, as the case was finally adj
journed to nine of the clock, in the fore
noon, of Monday, May 2S.
City attorney Orr appeared for the
prosecution and Col. Clark and Judge
Mills for the defendant. Objection was
raised by the defense to the complaint
which, Judge Mills said, was drawn so
as to leave a bad gap, as the town
where the offense was committed was
not named. TWAS stated in the complaint
that defendant knew this man to be
prohibited from receiving liquor but
how could he know when no town was
named. Might be the town of Lancas-
ter or a town in California. If one
town had been named it would be diff
erent. Under the present complaint
the defendant was put on wild goose
chase that would take the matter out
of the courts jurisdiction.
Mr.. Orr said the defense had taken
the exact position he had expected them
to take and course all attorneys take
where their client has no case. The
attorney took the ground it was the
duty of the defendant to know that
Levins was on the prescribed list. Had
the speaker drawn the complaint he
would have drawn it in q similar manner
except perhaps to have left out ''know-
ing him to be so.' but that cut no
figure in the case. The prosecution
proposed to show that the defen dant
, did know by the best of proof.
The Court thought the complaint was
a very good one for a country justice
, to draw up.
: Judge Mills.--"Of course. You would
be guilty of murder if you destroyed
your own progeny" Further discus
sion on this point was cut short by 9
notice from Col. Clark that the defense
would call for q jury, coupled with q
suggestion that as they could not fin
ish the case by night it would be vel
to adjourn to another day. Judge
! Mills thought they might strike jury
: and have it continued for week.
Mr.. Orr did not want to make any
e farce of the matter, if defense would
h make affidavit that some material wit
= nesses were out of their reach, or i
any good cause could be shown, he wa!
1 willing to have the case continued, bu
e thought an adjournment to Monda,
i would be sufficient.
After considerable discussion and .
plainly evinced fear by the court tina
:. it was intended to throw the case ou
of his jurisdiction, an affidavit was pre-
pared on which the case was continue,
: to the time above stated.
d The question that is agitatinp th
= eastern Democratic mind Just at pre-
sent is, has John Kelly and Ben But
: Ter formed an alliance for mutual benz
fit. Added Importance is given to th
answer by the little difficulty which ha
l. sprung mp between Tammany and il
is first love. Gov. Cleveland. AS tn
, Tammany sacham is known to be yer
! loosely bound by party ties the receu
qusrrels which have developed. in RI
he gard to certain nominations by IN
m | covernOr are looked r,nny, bx- IL :;