Phillipsburg herald. [volume] (Phillipsburg, Kan.) 1882-1905, 1894-07-05


speeches stating that 1t was shit atme," SO 1t
was, John, but afterwards In the interest OF hnr-
mony, the monton was withdrawn. Experience
IN sometimes dear school, yet some people will
learn In no other,
And now for the information OF that portion Of
the citizens OF Philllpsburg who from necessity
are compelled TO get their knowledge OF certain
transactions from persons who are influenced often
by passion, often by prejudice, and who circulate
IA facts, rumors picked up on street corners.
now wish 10 state the actual proof ard crCum-
stances In the care OF the City VA, Anna g. Hlm.
norman and Ella Houston This was a case In
which the charge made was for selling "intoXlcat'
ing malt lqnor without having a druggists per
nit no to do" An affidavit TO that effect was
made by the prosecuting witnese on the nth day
Of June 1894 charging that defendants on the 10th
Of said month Sunday did 70 sell Intoxicating
malt llqaUrs. But before examining the evidence
N the case, let me state that the Supreme Court
Of this state, In "a Kansas reports decided "that
person cannot no convicted under the prOhibltory
law for keeping In her house, store or In ware
room intoxicating liquors for his own use or for
giving them away" Let me eay in this c0nnec-
ton, that the role Of the common law In criminal
cases has always been in the language Of judges
In charging jurles, "a defendant IL always 10 be
considered innocent until he Ii by aprepondereuce
OF evidence beyond a reasonable doubt proven
10 be guilty-that he IL always entitled To the
benefit OF that presumption until II Is removed by
facts Inconsistent with every presumption OF in
noCenCe so important has this rule been held
acted into a law which reads a. follows: "a de-
PENDANT II presumed 10 be innOcent until the con
trary IL proven, When there II a reasonable doubt
whether his guilt IL satisfactorily shown, he must
be acquitted
Now, keeping the law In such cases In view,
brief statement Of the evidence In the case II
seems that on Sunday, the 10th OF June, the prose.
cutting witness, by his own showing, called A. the
house OF the defendant, drank bottle Of beer
with Mrs Houston, IN her room, made arrange.
ments with her for a buggy ride In company with
Mrs. Jenny Bennett and u young man whose name
u Is unnecessary 10 mention About Two O'Clock
he aud his buggy was on hand Three bottles Of
beer were placed In the buggy by Mrs. Houston,
and the party drove away, but picked up before
driving far another young man. The party spent
the dey no matter how or where ana got back TO
the city at about O'Clock on the morning Of the
nth. IL was In evidence however that they took
supper at Long leland. The prosecuting witness
swOre that he paid vi 90 for the beer mentioned
they, the women swore positively that he not only
did not pay for the beer but that they themselves
furnished the beer and paid all the expense of the
| excursion here was decided conflict In the eyi.
donCe. Mrs Houston swore that the three bot.
lies of beer were hers and not Mrs. Himmerman's
| that she brought them from the cellar round the
house aud that Mrs. u, knew nothing about it and
did not sell the beer h. anyone, The only other
evidence against the defendants was that Jenny
Bennett got for her own use one bottle and paid
| 20 cents for H. Witness Rice swOre that he at
one time bought bottle and paid % cents for 1t
to Misc Bennett Mrs, u, swOre very positively
that ehe did not authorize the sale Of beer by any
one, that the beer brought right to her house by
| Mr. Baker belonged to her son from his place up
| In town when he quit busness that the empty
bottles In the back yard were there when she rent
ed the house. MIR. Daum swore 10 the same fact
she also swore that the license spoken of 10 MIR,
Boughton from the U. S. belonged to and was
taken out by her SON Mr.. H. Williams very
candid railroad man testified that he had been a
bOarder and lodVer OF the defendants for over
year and that he had never seen beer or malt sold
| at the house Of Mrs. Y.
This then Is the whole case about which so
much criticism has been made against me and
which has been made as Il text TO abuse me TO
crafty certain gentlemuns malice and justify
his eneers ut my motive sin making my decision.
And now MIR. Editors one word in regard to
statement made in last weeks Dispatch. After
CONVECTION OF Mrs Y. 1.-THE charge against Mrs. ii.
having been dismissed by the city attorney she
asked for an appeal TO the District Court. l gave
her blank bond to get filed, and issued commit
ment and directed the marshal to go with her To
enable her to get bail which ia always done in such
circumstances by all courts. | never told him Ito
keep it in his pocket" said 10 him IL she cannot
get bail the writ in your hands directs you as to
what you will have TO do with her. | never said
to him You can just keep this In your pocket
you know nor did he ever say to me 81 don't
propose TO be party to any such business" nor
did say "very well, | have given you hint" ]
did say to him "She has right to have time to
procure bail and she il in your custody All the
balance tending to reflect on my action in the
matter is simply untrue. When che aud the mar
shall left my office II was for the purpose of en-
abng her to get bail for her appeal She had
perfect right 10 have such privilege | stayed
in my office until after o'clock then went home
and did not zee them again until they came to my
home about dusk. Mrs. H. then informed me
that she had been anable to procure bail and ask
ed me the question, IF | pay the hue and So 10
OF the cost and the balance in the time as stated
in the Crhtcy artlCe?' then replied, IL am VIII
ling to wait for my fees as you request if Mr., b.
ltuil Il tNt ybi ha pliad |
get mine out Of the first money paid in" IAN
right" / said. Then they left Mr.. b. shortly
after returned and offered to pay me the $1,000,
ubut directed him to pay 1t into the court which
he did next morning And that was all there was
of this "head aud front of my offending" and out
of this, that sweet specimen Of truth loving hui
manity-suCh humanity, indeed-seizes upon Us
preteXt for an exhibition Of his horse leech
malice
And now, John, word or more with you be-
fore we part-better friends have parted for u less
cause-l want to say TO you that Notwithstanding
ali your slurs and dirty inuendoes about my sym
pathy for those erring women, rather than that
the city marshal should have been compelled to
place Mrs q. In the ciCy sweat box that night,
would have recepted my docket in full for my
fees, S. 10, impeCunious as sometimes find my
self. Now make the most of that John. That
have pity for that ass, not for their Magduen
calling, will not deny. would not deserve to
be called u man II had not
Let me suggest 10 you, John, if you have ever
neuTu Ol lIi W pOnuer upon certain event which
for near 1880 years has thrilled the heart OF the
erriug and rgDuked the pride Of the sell righteous
aud unfOrgving, | refer to the time when a
bowling moo, with stones in their hands demand
cd the blood OF an erring sister, but heavenly jus
tiCe Gained the rabDle by saying that lie that was
without sin, was TO throw the first stOue. Gently
one by one they skunk away, when heavenly
charity and compassion and with benign benldic-
ton the erring magdaline was told by tne Ssn of
God, neither do condemn thee, gO,slnno more"
All! indeed how few Of us, claiming to be His
disciples, follow His teaching III this respect, or
imntate His example.
Aud now John q Royce editor Of the Phillips
burg Dispatch, wash 10 say that while beg not
Tor quarter, do not wish uness compelled to,
meet you again at Phillips"