Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1907-05-26
Witness Beer Again Refuses to Answer Questions and the
Fact IS Reported to COuft--laWyefs VIII
Argue the Point Monday
Meantime Jury ReCesses Until Tuesday Rev. Gray |,
Acquitted Of Criminal Libel in District Court
Buchanan Tried Monday for Murder

Tony Beer, the silent witness, still
persists in his silence. Ut appears
that yesterday he was asked a number
of questions by the grand jurors and
he refused to answer them, claiming
that his answers might tend to in
| criminate him. .3 rs
Chance to Break" the Law.
This will give Attorney Townsend
lanother opportunity to show his skill
( in breaking the law" The grand
fury having reported the fact Of Tony
Beers silence, this party was called
upon by Judge Winchester to show
lcause why he should not be commit
ted for contempt Of court. Mr.. Town
send appeared in response to said
order as attorney for Beer, aeknowl-
edged service of the order and asked
an adjournment of the hearing until
q p. m. Monday, which was granted. V;
In Judges Chambers.
The grand jury made report to
Judge Winchester at his chambers,
l:all parties consenting to same, the
court house being occupied by Judge
Kneeshaw and jury in the Gray libel
case. Judge Winchester, States At
torney Patterson, Judge Corliss, were
present with the grand jury, besides
the clerk of court and the court re-
porter Other members of the bar
were also present, among them being
Bert Townsend, but not least, was the
witness, now defendant, Anton Beer
Questions That Were Asked.
The following statement or report
of facts in the case was filed in the
court by the grand jury, followed by
the order Of the court: tss
In District Court, Sixth Judicial Dis
trict. "a ;s5 II.
State Of North Dakota, County of
Burleigh.
B In the matter Of the report off the
grand jury Of Burleigh county, North
Dakota, to the Court, Of the refusal
of Anton Beer to testify as a witness.
The grand jury Of Burleigh county,
North Dakota, duly summoned and
|simpaneled, makes to the court the
following report touching the refusal
of one Anton Beer to testify as a wit
ness before them:
The said Anton Beer, after being
duly worn to testify to the truth,
1.-The whole truth and nothing but the
truth in the matter of the investiga-
tion Of the guilt Of Edward G. Pat
terson for the offense of selling in-
toxicating liquor as beverage, and
for the offense of keeping a place
where intoxicating liquors were sold
as i beverage;
Report to the court, in open court,
that the said Anton Beer was by the
forman Of said grand jury asked the
following questions, and that he de-
clined to answer each of said ques-
tions on the ground that the answer
might tend to incriminate him:
@. II so, how long have you been
in such employment?
@. So far as you know, are all the
receipts Of the business there carried
on by Edward 6. Patterson turned
over TO him or to someone represent
ing him?
@. Has Edward g. Patterson dur.
ing the time you were working for
him had intoxicating liquors shipped
in to him? ISL
@. II SO, how often and in what
quantities? 81
@. If Intoxicating liquors have been
shipped in to him, have they been
stored in said hotel building?
@. If SO, In what part thereof?
O. Did you ever see anyone drink
ing Intoxicating liquor In said hotel2
G. # SO. how often have you seen
them, and state the different places?
@. Is there cafe in said hotel?
a How close to said cafe were
intoxicating liquors stored in sail
hotel il they were stored thereing
The grand Jury therefore requests
the court to make such order with
respect to the duty Of said Anton
Beer to answer the foregoing ques-
tions as to the court shall seem prop
I}erand lawful. 1
Dated May rs, 1907.
j. Il. BELL,
Foreman OF Grand Jury.
rr7r, 1yrrnr