The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1907-04-02

he did not think he was getting full
measure. Vilott told the Chinaman to
let Mr.. Norris have it for 20 cents. Mr..
Norris produced this bottle of whisky
which he said he had purchased on that
occasion and it was marked as an ex-
hibit in the case.
On a third occasion, January 80, 1907,
Mr.. Norris visited the place again and
said he purchased a large bottle of
beer.
"A quart bottle,p asked Mr.. Schenck.
What is called quart bottle" re-
piled Mr.. Norris. He added that he
paid Vilott 25 cents for this beer and
that he bought half pint of whisky
from the Chinaman for 35 cents. He
produced what he said was this whisky.
Mr. Norris testified that on all his
visits to the place he had seen men
and women congregated there and on
ers in the place were drinking beer
All He Wanted Was Evidence.
Cross examined by Mr.. Schoch, Mr..
Norris said that before he took up his
position with the State Temperance
union he had been pastor of a church
al Tonganoxie for three years. He
declared that she made the purchases
of liquors only for the purpose of
ascertaining that liquor was being sold
in violation of the la wand not for his
personal use.
He admitted drinking liquor in the
Owl on January 4.
What was your purpose in drink
ing liquor on the PREMISES asked
Mr.. SchOch.
II bought it and drank it to know
that it was whisky replied the wit
ness.
Did you not know it was a viola
ton of the law" asked the lawyer.
ito drink liquor on premises where 1t
is sold?"
Il did not" was the reply.
Lawyer Schoch wanted to know why
Mr.. Norris had made so many trips to
the place and Mr.. Norris replied that
he wanted to be satisfied that the place
was selling liquor in violation of the
law.
Bought Beer for the Crowd.
You testified that you saw persons
drinking beer in the place, queried
Mr.. Schoch.
Il did, was the answer.
"How do you know they were drink
ing beer?''
the rather conclusive reply
How did you happen to buy them
beer % was the next question.
well, 1 wanted to dispose of the
bottle Of beer 1 had purchased an
swered the witness. Il did not want
to drink it all. 1t was on table.
Some others came in the place and
sat down at the table L told them to
help themselves. and they drank up
the beer. There were others in the
like what 1 had purchased.
For the next fews questions it was
evident as to the line the defense will
pursue. Vilott was a hack driver at
one time. Mr.. Norris was asked if he
did not see hacka in front of the
Owl on the occasions he had visited
the place. He said he had. Mr.. Shoch
then asked him If he had not seen
Vilott go out and attend to the hack to
see that everything was all right with
it. Mr.. Norris replied that he had not.
He said he noticed telephone in the
place, but had never seen Vilott called
hack.
on redirect examination Mr. Norris
said that he had no interest in the
case except as a person seeking for
an honest conscientious enforcement
of the prohibitory law. He declared
that he knew the reputation of the
Owl as a place where the liquor law
was fiagrantly violated. At the con-
clusion of his cross examination a re-
cess was taken at the noon hour until
/: 80 o'clock this afternoon The prose-
and it is possible that the case will
not be concluded today.
The district court calendar for the
next few days contains many of these
liquor cases resulting from the raids
of County Attorney Schenck and Sheriff
WilkersOn. Galen Nichols is attorney
for the defendants in five of these
cases, two of which were set for to-
morrow and three for the next day
He is ill, and at the request of Mr..
who appeared for Mr.. Mich
OILS, Judge Dana removed the cases
from the calendar temporarily.