News and citizen. [volume] (Morrisville, Vt. ;) 1881-current, 1896-05-14

|
house In 1872 A. Yes, SIR.
q. And you bought 1t for the purpose
OF ascertaining whether or not Il would be
possible 10 keep q temperance hotel In Yer
mont, did you? A. did not, sir.
2. But at all events, you bought It with
the resolution that you would keep tenn
peranee hotel in Vermont? A. / bought It
with the resolution that / would not deal in
intoxicating liquor.
Q. That would amount TO the same
thing as the keeping of a temperance hotely
A. Yes; ordinarily called temperance hotel.
q. And l understand you to say that
you were moved to that resolution by con-
soientious seruples against the traffic in in
tOxicating liquors? A. Yes; besides the
respect for law.
q. You believe in the first place that a
man ought to keep the lawI A. Yes.
Q. Whatever 1t may beS A. (No answer.) |
Q. And you believe in the second place |
that, law or no law, the traffic in intoxicat-
ing liquor is wrOngY A. Is perniciOus.
q. And that everything which contrib |
utes to it, or permits it, or encourages it is |
pernicous. Is that right? A. l don't know |
whether l would put it as strong as that.
q. About how strong would you put it? |
A. guess will let you tell it.
Q. ask you question and ask you to |
answer 1t. The question is whether you be- |
lieve that everything which contributes to,
or encourages, or permits, or permits the
use or traffic in intoxicating liquor is per-
nicious? Collected to-
Mr.. Prouty: This is cross-eXamination
the direct examination was pretty broad. A.
| | cannot answer that question.
| q. You don't know whether you so be
| lieye or not? A. No, | don't. That Is such
broad question | can't say.
Q. We may he able to make 1t a little
more specific, but for the present will con-
| fine your attention to the first two years
when you ran the Van Ness house, and I'M
derstand you to say that Mr.. Bowman was
employed and installed In the Van Ness
house as your manager? A. He was in part
nership with me.
O. But at any rate, he assumed the
management of the hotel? A. He did.
Q. What was the success, the financial
success, of that venture? A. We paid ex-
| penses, g per cent on the Investment and
little something besides.
Q. On the whole, however, it was a
tribe discouraging, wasn't it? A. Somewhat.
@. Mr.. Drew, right across the way with
the American house, bad bar? A. Yes.
@, And you found that Mr.. Drew and
his bar were serious competitors to the Van
Ness house? A. think we made as much
money as he did.
Q. Didn't you find Mr.. Drew and his
bar to be pretty serious competitors? A. l
didn't find his bar to be any competitor
whatever, it was Mr.. Drew.
@. Then the idea which you have sug-
gested here of the advantage which a
hotel has from the sale Of intoxicating
liquors is without any foundation? A. No,
sir. You asked me what | considered the
competition.
Q. understood you to say in the first
place that Mr.. Drew, with his bar, stood
there as perpetual menace to the Van Ness
house. A. | didn't say anything of the kind.
@. Did you find the American house
with its bar more serious competitor to the
3 Van Ness house than the American house
$ without any bar would have been? A.
: don't know. | never had this competitor
l without the bar, so | can't tell.
t Q. | am asking you for your opinion as
a hotel man. A. ! should not give 1t.
a Q. Whether you think 1t is necessary, OF
1 whether you think it is Of advantage to Q
l. man who keeps hotel In Vermont to run s
s bar in connection with it? A. According
# to how many times he is indicted.
n Q. Suppose he was the governor so ht
: could manage that? A. Governor or any
o body else, an honest man would manage 1t a
V he pretends to.
. Q. The governor is legally presumed t.
A be au honest man. The rest of us may no
Ell he. 1t occurred to you that it would be
d fine thing II you could manage to consolidate
d the American house and the Van Ness hous
+ and Mr.. Drew, bar or no bar, didn't it? A
1t Why, of course that ought to be paten
y to any one, and to you, good business man a
II you are.
| Q. am not business man, certainly
e. am not acting as one now. A. 1t was yer
n desirable thing for both of us.
1t @. And for the purpose of doing tina
u you entered into an arrangement with MI
,r Drew by which you proposed to cOnsOlidat
in the two establishments. AS a part Of tn
arrangement was the bar in the America
r. house to be discontinued? A. Nothing wa
If said about 1t. | had nothing to do with il
~ L. 1nfI al.4NNf
bar? A. Yes, said | would not rent it.
n @. You and Mr.. Drew had some tai
70 about the bar? A. told him / would no
| rent the billiard room and bar. / had NJ
10 use for them.
E, @. Mr.. Drew thought that a bar was
r pretty good thing in connection with hotel
A. He didn't say anything about it. FL
r said, l am willing to keep it. 1t WASH
necessary to have his bar; one was RICH
next to it, if his had been closed.
e. @. Wouldn't have been as good for MI
~ Drew? A. That may be.
10 @. Then this was the final arrangement
ne which was worked out. wasn't it, that tn
consolidated? Mr.. Drew was TO act as man
- ager of the two hotels and was TO retain hi
" bar in the American house as it had bee
y before? A. l was not to rent it.
= @. You testified that Mr.. Drew pre-
IL posed to you to assign the whole lease
v
~ the American house and that you should re
o. lease to him the bar, and that you declined t
IN do that and preferred to have it the Othe
III way. Why was that? A. Because / didn
81 want to have anything to do with the lea'
i ing of the barrOom to any one.
~ Q. Did you conceive that 1t would b
re any worse, morally, to make that kind of a
~ ~ arrangement, allow Mr.. Drew to take tn
NJ u. lease and make the assignment to you, tina
IL it would be for you to take the lease an
10 make the transfer to Mr.. Drew! A.
III can't see what YOU mean by 1t. l can
10 understand there was any moral oHquit
NJ in my renting a certain piece of prof.
~ erty. and leaving balance to the maj
VI whether 1t contained a bar or brothel, as ia
o. as that is concerned. l had nothing to d
ne with that. What is the point2
az @. The fact was that Mr.. Drew assume
n II, the management of these two houses an
eu that right In the old American house that be
:. was left. That is the fact isn't 1t? A.
az couldn't take 1t out. l had nothing to
IL with 1t.
ed O. If you bad been actuated by the
high conscientious motives you might pc
m sibly have taken ii outg A. How so?
20 Q. You could have leased the who
n, business and bIOtted out that? A. No, sir.
n. Q. Couldn't you have leased that pro
bs erty, that whole property, instead of adop
o. ing this sort of device to leave that b;
=.
ed talk about device to me; ! have done tn
II thing in a conscientious way.
at @. At the present time you are wi
70 ness and am counsel, and l shall eXamir
you within the rules of examination as | 81
fit. A. And | shall answer as 1 see fit whe
you undertake TO insult me.
~ O. | don't want to insult you. YC
~ answer my question. A. don't find an
NJ fault with your questions.
"a Q, don't find any fault with yOt
!! answers, hut shall be obliged to conduct th
j.. examination in my own way. A. And sha
r. r. be obliged to answer you just as you as
" your questions.
" O. Proceed. A. Go ahead.
Q. Now then, the result of this who
es proceeding was to leave barroom right
lg connection with the American house?
" No, sir.
Ia Q. What was the reason? A. 1t was in Il
~ same block.
as Q. Was 1t in the same buildingY A. A
ne those down there are In the same building.
- @. Wasn't this barroom right In the san
OF building with the American houseY A.
ne was In the same block.
ar @. Wasn't there communication betwe6
el that barroom and the remainder of TIL
2, houseY A. There wasn't when l ordere
III 1t closed.
Y; O. How do you know II was closedP 4
NoII