St. Paul daily globe., 1896-03-06

had been to the place but twice, and
once only as far as the door?"
Witness admitted that he had eX-
pressed the opinion that Murphy would
never get another license but he de-
MED the rest.
Ezra Ezekiel McCrea, assistant city
clerk, testified as to the license and
produced the record, made out in the
name of the Joseph Schlitz Brewing
| company.
Immediately upon the opening in the
afternoon Attorney Butler announced
that the state rested it's case.
Mr.Johns at once began the presenta-
| tion of the defendants case to the
| jury, saying, in part:
I'VE will show you that Mr.. Muir
phys saloon is as orderly and well con-
Quoted as any place Of that character
in the city. We will show that the
place adjoining is separated from the
saloon by a solid brick wall, and that
for many months Mr.. Murphy has sub
! let these privileges and that there
was, and is a restaurant in operation
there
Mary Sullivan was called. Witness
testified to having lived in ST. Paul
about fifteen years She knew Muir
phys place, and had taken her meals
there for three or four months.
Eugene Granna, who runs the res
taurant, was the next witness.
When Mr.. Granna appeared, Mr.. But
lei demanded a stenographer, so that
should he testify that he was the pro-
prietor of the restaurant he might be
convicted on the charge of operating a
disorderly place.
Mr.. Butler asked the court to instruct
the witness not to answer any ques-
ton that would tend to prove him
guilty of a crime that might be
char ged, which the court did
Witness testified to keeping his place
open all night. Murphy also, the wit
ness said, kept his place open all night.
Asked if he could give the names of
any women who took their meals at
his place, Granna said he did not know
any OF them except by their first names.
George Anderson, a grocer near Muir
phys place, testified to selling Granna
supplies and taking an occasional meal
In the restaurant. He did not know who
owned or conducted the place, however,
and was dismissed.
Mr.. Murphy" called Attorney Johns,
and necks were craned that their own
ers might get better view of the ac-
cused as he stepped forward to be
sworn.
Glow long have you been in bust
ness?'' asked Mr.. Johns.
Two years in my present place. Pre-
viously 1 occupied the store in which
Mr. Grenna now conducts a restau-
rant"
DO you rent both stores now?"
Il do. I sublet to Grenna and take
part payment in meals for myself and
two bartenders. I get two or three
meals day in the restaurant, as do
my bartenders.
81 know" said Mr.. Murphy at this
point, that I shall have to give my
testimony according to the rulings of
the court, but 1 should like to tell this
story from beginning to end, just as it
happened"
go on" said Mr. Johns, and the
court nodded approval
He had taken the corner store and,
thinking an adjoining restaurant would
aid his business, had secured two men
to undertake the venture. For two
months they paid no rent. Finally,
they neglected their business, and Mr..
Granna had bought them both out. This
was on the 18th of April, 1895. Mr.. But
ler here interposed an objection, urging
that the witness be examined in the reg
ular way. Th court allowed Mr.. Muir
ply to proceed as before He then
went on to tell how, if guests ordering
meal desired drinks, they were served.
There was a swinging door between
his saloon and the restaurant. Some
times his porter brought drinks and
sometimes Granna's assistant. Mr..
Murphy next told of Mrs. Edholm's Wis
it to his place, and what took place at
that time, repeating in general the story
a of
In account Of the previous days pro-
ceedings.
"Is there any truth in the statements
made by Mrs. Root regarding what she
claims to have seen and heard at your
placer" asked Mr. Johns.
Mr.. Butler objected to an answer be-
cause Murphy had not been there at
the time. The objection was sustained.
The same disposition was made of
second question by Mr.. Johns regarding
the visit of Mrs. Root and her party.
Mr.. Butler did not cross-eXamine
him.
John Covington was next called. Wit
ness testified to living within half a
block of Murphy's, and also sWore to
the conversation of the previous day
between himself and Rev. Morgan, in
which witness said Morgan had said he
had only visited Murphys place twice,
and upon one occasion only went as far
as the door.
Asked if he had ever been disturbed
by occurrences at the alleged disorder
| ly house of defendant, witness said no.
| A long discussion here took place be-
tween the attorneys regarding the ad-
mission of such testimony and the de-
finition of a disorderly house. Mr.. But
Ter maintained the question was imma-
| terial. Attorney Johns said he had not
| only this witness, but others to show
| the peace of the neighborhood had not
been habitually disturbed, and wanted
the ruling of the court. The lack of
noise, Mr.. Butler said, did not show a
place not to be disorderly, as provid-
ed by the statute governing such cases.
After the court had sustained the OBJ
lection of the county attorney, the
case was adjourned until today at 10
| o'clock.