The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1897-11-04
Mrs. taylor Didn't Like
Liquor Business
SHE SECURED EVIDENCE,
Was In Form OF Half Pin's Bought
From Green Gr0csrs.
GAVE HER TESTIMONY IN COURT

Two cases i'm which the Lonsdale Law
ana Order League was Interested were
tried i'm Judge WilDur's court this morn
ing before jury. Both cases were
against Cumberland merchants who are
accused Of the illegal sale OF OF liquor
Ths men ON trial had been found guilty
in the district court at Central falls and
had taken appeals The first case tried
was that of Frederick J. Sweers who was
charged with selling liquor to one Mary
IL. Taylor at her home
Mrs Taylor was the first witness called
aud she stated she resided In Lonsdale
and knew MIR. Sweers the defendant, VINO
was a green grocery peddlcr, and that
ON the morning of May llth he caino TO
her house about 1880 O'Clock. she pnr-
chased half pint of whisky from him
for which she paid 20 cents. Her nus
band WAS in the parlor while sne pur-
chased the liquor from Mr.. Swcers In the
kitchen. On cross examination she saiu
her husband stayed away from work the
morning of May llth to find out where
she got her liquor. On taking the liquor
from Mr.. Sweers she had informed him
her husband was in the other room and
he had said ''For Gods sake put that
away where he won't sec 1t. she denisd
that plot had been made TO entrap Mr..
Sweers and said there was no conver-
eation bet wven herself and husband about
sjwcers previous Hs-te- Aef purchasing the
liquor.
fed that her husband did not know she
had purchased liquor from Sweers on any
other occasion.
Mathew Taylor, husband OF the prev
fous witness, testified that on tho morn
ing of Nav IL, he remained at home for
the reason his wife had given, and that
he heard her order n half pint OF whisky.
On cross.examination witness admitted
it was agreed between himself and wife
that she was TO leave tho liquor where he
could see II after she purchased lt. MIR.
Taylor made il very difficult for the de-
fendant's attorney To get answers to GER
tain questions.
Fred j. Sweers. the defendant. denied
he sold the liquor TO Mrs. Taylor and
testified that early i'm the evening on Oct.
2, Mrs Taylor came to his store and
kaid, What are you going to do about
The casei" and he replied with anoth,
question, "What casey' and ID this the
answer was, "You know She then
wantsd him To sec her husband and ray
him some money as she wanted 10 move
and would never appear in court against
witness.
On cross-examination he said he did
NOT 60 TO the Taylor nOuS6 Dccauso Inty
owed him 81 or IS, and that on the
morning Of May II he was called in by
Mrs Taylor, but refused To give her any
thing on account of her Indebtedness to
him being unliquidated.
A son of Mr. Sweers testified to hear
ing the conversation his father had sworn
TO having with Mrs Taylor and said the
statements made by his father were cor
-ect Joseph Thornley, testified that he saw
Mrs. Taylor in Mr. Sweer's store on Oct.
1ltb. but did not hear the conversation
between the proprietor and his supposed
customer.
Mrs. Taylor was recalled and deuied
expressing any desire 90 have tho case
against oweers settled but said she did
90 to his store but it was for the purpose
of talking about some scandalous stories
young Sweers had spread concerning her
The jury found the defendant guilty.
Assistant Attorney General Stcarns rep
esented the state and Joseph Osiield, DR..
the defendant.
The second case was against James Nc
Grath who, in addition 20 keel ing a
licensed liquor saloon, carries on tho busi-
1css OF green grocer, ana mas u wagon
that he uses in pcddling. lie wns charged
with having on tho same day "a sweers
cold half pint of whiskey 10 Mrs Iay