The true northerner. [volume] (Paw Paw, Mich.) 1855-1920, 1904-01-22
Circuit Court.

idtitn VI iotoi oltioh ~" ','HV'N'>'N -
this case, a South Haven druggist. hav-
ing previously changed his plea.to guilty,
was sentenced to pay fine of 5000 with
S57 additional as costs and to 60 days
Imprisonment in the county Jail.
The people VS.. Myron Wakeman; re-
spondent in this case was also South
Haven drugstore man who had previ-
ously pleaded guilty to having violated
the local option law. The sentence In
his case was 500 fine, sos costs and 6O
days 10 Jail
The people VS.. Charles f.. Hessey, an
other South Haven druggist, charged
with having violated the local option
law. This case was tried by jury and a
verdict of guilty rendered. Hessey s
sentence was 70 days Imprisonment in
jail, $500 fine and Sl55 costs.
The people VS.. Oscar r. Goodrode; the
respondent in this case was a drugstore
clerk ia South Haven, and, having
pleaded guilty of violation of the local
option law, he was sentenced to pay a
! fine of 500 with S57 costs and 40 days
in Jail, 90 days additional in case of non
payment of fine.
The people VS.. Herman COIN; the re-
spondent in this case, "A Paw Paw man,
was charged with a(violation of the local
option law (bootlegging); case tried re-
sulting in a disagreement of the jury.
Ella Leoua Hellyer VS.. Frederick j.
Hellyer; divorce; decree granted on the
ground of desertion and non-support.
The people VS.. Lynn Simmons; the re-
spondent in this case, at the last Noyem-
Der term Of the court was convicted 10y
verdict of the Jury, of the crime of rape
but was not sentenced. a petition signed
by 81 citizens asserting belief in respond
ent's innocence and asking a suspension
of sentence was presented to the court
Another like petition with 36S sigma
lures, asserting belief in innocence and
asking the court to be as leniehS as pos
sible was also presented. The extreme
penalty that might have been imposed
was Imprisonment for life, but taking
into consideration the circumstances
surrounding the case and regarding ia
vorably the petitions for judicial elem
ency Judge Carr sentenced the respond
ent to the Ionia Reformatory for a
period of not less than 81 years ano
not to exceed AZ years.
The people VS.. j. l.. Congdon, also q
South Haven drugstore case; respondent
tried by jury and found guilty; five days
given to settle bill of exceptions to su
preme court; respondent ordered to give
bonds in the sum of 81 900 for his APP
pearance at the first day of next term.
The points relied on by respondent are
as follows: That the information does
set forth the manner in which the law
has been violated nor what violation o.
the law is intended to be proved against
him, and that he has been deprived o.
his liberty contrary to the provisions o.
the constitution Of the United States
etc. In granting the motion the court
used the following language
This is a motion to suspend the pro
ceedings until the case is reviewed in the
supreme court of this state and in the su
preme court at Washington on aconstitu
tiona! question. The Michigan suprem,
court has settled the point, and this
seems to be an effort to have its action Sc
4 aside by the United Estates suprem,
court | dislike to grant the motion be
cause it is opposed by the prosecutor.
The liquor traffic is the curse of tn,
ages, and here IN the local option count,
of Van Buren, this defendant last sum
mer kept an open saloon. according t
the evidence that the prosecuting attor
ney was compelled to cat-haul from tn,
witnesses who were su0poenaed for tn,
people.
1t is my experience as a lawyer anC
as a Judge that there IL more periur,
: committed in liquor suits than in al
other suits put together. There wer
three witnesses testified to-day who's
J names | have before me- and it wa
plain that they not only committed per
jury, but willful and deliberate perjury
by keeping back the truth and givin,
evasive answers. One of them | wa
obliged to speak to with reference to hi
testimony.
The statute of Michigan gives tn
court the power to punish for contemp
any apparent perjury in any case, and
; may in the future invoke that statut
! and punish such visible evasons of TIA
c truth Those men called for whis<e
high-ball or gin phiz and then testifie,
that they did not know whether Their
was whiskey or gin in it.
Y THE motion will be granted on tn
condition that the defendent give GOO
I and sufficient bond in the sum of
thousand dollars for his appearance i
the next term of this court and that tn
bill of exceptions be settled within tiv
days