The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1901-04-16
.LlNCkS Ora Wis.
Refuses to Make Complaint
Against Saloonkeeper
He Arrested.
SAYS POLICE ARE PAID FOR IT
Judge Hoos Discharges Lester
and che Epworth League
Makes Threats.

"aS uesiit this morning what its leaders
consider crushing blow in the First
Criminal Court. George H. Lincks, of
| No ia Ege avenue, its leader, was routed
from what he has considered a very
strong position He retreated, suffering
defeat keenly, vowing vengeance.
| saloon bartender whose arrest he caused
was discharged Lincks says he will re-
sort to higher courts, the Police Board
/ and the law in general.
Mr.. Lincks, as told in last nights
4 News and several of his workers were
in the lower section of the city Sunday
i until late in the evening. Mr. Lincks
| was standing in front of the saloon of
| Michael Moran, at the corner of Barrow
j street and Newark avenue, when he saw
a man come out with a can. He suspected
that the can was full of beer and called
| the attention of Chanceman Whalen. Of
| the First precinct police station, to the
man. The policeman took the man and
| the can into the saloon. They were fol-
lowed by Mr. Lincks. While the police
man was talking to bartender Edward
Lester, the man who had carried the can
4 took French leave and disappeared Then
the policeman took Lester and the can
and Mr.. Lincks to the station house
Lester was charged with violation of the
Sunday liquor selling law. When the case
| was called yesterday morning Mr.. Lincks
did not appear and Police Justice Hoos
of the First Criminal Court issued sum-
| mons for him.
| The case was reopened this morning
with Mr.. Lincks down for the part of
star witness. He did not like the role and
at first fatty refused to testify. He ex-
pressed desire to make a statement
without being sworn. Counsellor James
Manning, who appeared in defence of
Lester, objected. He demanded that only
sworn testimony be admitted in the case.
Mr.. Lincks held to his refusal to testify,
saying that the policeman made the ar
rest on his own responsibility and should
appear as the complainant. Judge Hoos
pointed out that Whalen had arrested
Lester at Lincks command and that he
and the policeman were jointly respon-
| sible for the arrest of the defendant.
Il shall not be sworn said Mr.. Lincks.
) Then L move for the discharge of the
defendant said Counsellor Manning
AT this Mr.. Lincks grew pale and red
by turn. He then consented to be sworn
because he felt that the case should not
be allowed to drop there. He went on the
witness stand and told how the arrest
was made.
He said he was standing in front of
Morans saloon when the man with the
5 can entered. He went seeking a police
man and when the man was on the street
Policeman Whalen came along. He was
; due to report to his station from the sig
nal box at that corner at that time When
the bearer of the can was pointed out to
/ him he asked the man what he had.
| Jna rar1v
Come with me- commanded Whalen
| and the three marched into the store.
They took up a position before the bar,
Mr.. Lincks feeling uncomfortable but de-
; termined.
: When Lester was told he was under ar
i rest for selling beer he said he had not
t sold it but had given it away. He made
similar statement to the court yester-
day. Mr.. Lincks in his testimony said
!, that he had informed the policeman that
the arrest must be made on the police
mans own responsibility.
Because" said Mr.. Lincks 1--WE are
| not paid for this work and the police are.
drew his attention to the case and that
is all I have to say. He is the man to
act and bear the BURDEN
mot at ALL sas3 Judge Hoos, ''you or
dered the arrest and you are responsible.
There is no written complaint in this
case and one is necessary to hold this
man. Will you make a written COM
plant, Mr.. Lincks?"
mo, SIR was Mr.. Linck's stout reply.
: 81 shall not. The policeman should M Ike
the complaint
..Will you make a complaint" asked
Judge Hoos of Whalen.
II can't make complaint replied the
bluecoat, because 1 don't know whether
! the beer was sold or not. The man was
on the street with the can when 1 saw
t him. l shall not make an affidavit of ex-
else violation because I don't know that
there was any violation
. "Then l move for the discharge of Mr..
Lester said Counsellor Manning.
Again Mr. Lincks ragged. Judge Hoos
was in doubt. He hesitated. Counsellor
Manning then said
There is no complaint to hold this man
on and I demand his discharge. If it is
not done at once shall advise Mr.. Lester
to leave the court with me. Is there any
one here who has any complaint to make
against this defendant?" Mr.. Manning
asked, making the question so general as
to take in everyone in the court room
There was no reply.
Come, MI. Lester, Win me- SAID MI.
Manning, starting for the door.
Zone moment" Judge Hoos stopped
: him. THE Court has some rights in this
CASE
But there is no complaint. 1t is an
outrage to hold this man and he should
be discharged Immediately
He is discharged" said Judge Hoos.
The victors left the court for the street.
Mr. Lincks looked dazed. He flushed.
He started for the street door. Then he
retraced his steps to go to Chief Murphy s
J office.
We shall see if the Police Commission
ers cannot do something about this case, 2
he muttered he went through the
door.
While Mr. Lincks was awaiting an au-
dience with Chief Murphy he consented
to talk of the case to a News" reporter.
He said
''The decision will have far reaching
effect, think. 1t means that the selling
of beer in cans can go on on Sundays un-
hampered. That man should have been
held for the Grand Jury The circum-
stantial evidence was sufficient. That
policeman should have made written
complaint on the circumstantia Nvidence.
did not because am not paid for this