Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1897-11-19

Developed in the Criminal Court, Yes
terday,
On the Trial of the Case Of State v.
John Arthur, Indicted in Septem-
Der for Selling on "Short
4 License" Prosecuting At
torney and the Prosecuting Wit
ness Evidently Understood Each
Other"-A Verdict of Guilty, and
Motion in Arrest OF Judgement
and for a New Trial-The Case
Will Go Up.
In the Criminal Court, yesterday
morning, the case of State v. John Ar
thur, indicted for selling liquor under a
'sshort license" by the September grand
jury, was put on trial, and occupied the
entire day, the jury not coming in with
verdict of guilty until about half-past
four o'clock in the afternoon. The de-
Tense at once made motion in arrest
of judgment and for a new trial,
which the Court will consider later on.
In the event that these motions are
overruled-Which is prObable-the de-
Tense will take an appeal to the Circuit
Court and then to the supfeme Court
of the State.
The second case against Arthur is set
for December 18th, but it is understood
that counsel for defense will insist in
staying the proceedings in this and all
other cases until the Supreme Court
has passed upon the questions raised in
the preliminary proceedingssup to and
including the trial of yesterday.
Yesterdays case was tried by counsel
for defense with the sole view and pur-
pose of completing the record on which
an appeal can be taken, first to the Cir
cult Court and then to the Supreme
Court, and no effort was made to defeat
verdict of guilty.
Among the witnesses for the State
were Edward Bender, ,Thos. Clark and
John w. Kindelberger, from whom no
important testimony was obtained. The
witness upon whom the State chiefly re-
lied was George Sorgey who testified
to having gotten drinks at different
times at defendants saloon, and upon
one occasion-especially mentioned-to
having gotten whisky from defendant.
The cross-examination of this witness
was interesting, and strongly in
dicated that there was something
rotten in Denmark" Uhe following
stenographic report of this cross-eXam-
nation points moral and adorns a
tale:-
Q. On the second occasion that you
mentioned, that is the occasion you say
you got whiskey from Arthur, and Ed
Bender was with you, had you been
drinking anywhere else that evening? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. Was it during the day or night? A.
Along about supper time, 1 think; I
wouldn't be positive about it.
@. You had a horse and buggy? A. Yes,
sir.
@. When you mentioned team" with
reference to your visit there, that was a
working team-you were teaming? A.
Yes, sir.
Q. And the second occasion you speak
of, and mentioned a team" it was a
horse and buggy? You and Bender were
riding together? A. We come in from
there together.
@. Had drinks at a great many places
that day, had you, Mr.. Sorgey? A. No;
not great many places.
O. ask you to answer about how many
other places. A. Indeed, / couldn't tell
that.
O. At least a number of other saloons
A. 1 couldn't tell that; didn't make no
memorandum.
@. This is the question L am getting at;
Were you perfectly sober, or had you
been drinking enough to be influenced by
it at the time you got there? A. l think
I was sober
@. At all under the influence of drink?
A. No, sir.
@. You say that the first drink you got
there. whiskey, you bought it and paid
for it yourself? A. Yes, sir.
Q. Mr.. Sorgey, isn't it true that Mr..
Meyer, Mr.. w. C. Meyer, the prosecuting
attorney, paid for it? A. No, sir.
Objection.
Mr.. Howard: I expect to prove and ex-
pect this witness to admit it before l get
through
The Court. Proceed.
Q. Mr.. Sorgey, you remember that the
first whiskey or beer or drinks of any
kind that you got in Arthur's saloon,
that you had charged to Mr.. Meyer, and
that Mr.. Meyer afterwards, you were ad-
vised paid for it to Mr.. Arthur. You
know that is true isn't it? A. No, sir, /
don't.
Q. Is it not true that you on more than
one occasion bought drinks there yourself
and had Mr.. Arthur furnish them to 9th
er people, and that you told Mr.. Arthur
that Mr.. W. C. Meyer would pay for it.
and that he did pay for it afterwards?
a. No. sir.
Objection, because the gentleman doesn'
show that occurred between the first day
of May and the fourth day of September.
Q. I am talking about the first time you
were there at Arthur's saloon Did you
fix any date? A l didn't fix a particular