Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1909-09-25
Verdict Of Guilty in the
York Burglary Case.
Fred Gilbert Is Acquitted on
Nuisance Charge.
Liquor Case from Gardiner Now
Before the Court.

not guilty. Milford P. York of Wa
terville was convicted of burglary of
several articles from the residence Of
Mrs. Alex Yates at Waterville, while
Fred Gilbert of Gardiner was acquit-
ted on the charge of maintaining a
liquor nuisance.
The case of State VS.. Charles +.
Brann of Gardiner, an indictment for
maintaining a liquor nuisance. is now
on trial. After the disposition of the
Brann charge the case of State VS..
Charles E. Sturgis of Augusta, an in
dictment for maintaining a liquor null
sance, will be taken up, Fred Emery
Beane of Hallowell appearing as coun-
sci for the respondent. There are
also two single sale indictments
against Sturgis, one being the sale Of
pint of Whiskey to Martin Nolan and
the other being the sale of Il half pint
of whiskey to William Fl. Dreamer.
The next cases in order will be those
of State vs. Fred NJ Savage and Chas.
Marshall, both of Waterville, who were
both indicted at the last session of
the grand jury for maintaining a
liquor nuisance.
At the opening of the Superior court
Friday morning the case of State
versus Fred Gilbert of Gardiner, IN
indictment for maintaining a liquor
nuisance, was resumed, County Attor-
ney Hildreth appearing for the State
and Fred w. Clair of Waterville for
the respondent.
Mrs. Margaret +. Hamilton Of
Gardiner, at whose house the re-
spOndent boarded, teStifying for the
defence, said that the liquors were for
the respondents own consumption AMI
were not intended for illegal sale, and
no liquors had ever been sold by the
respondent on her premises.
After the Gilbert matter was given
to the jury the trial of State versus
Milford P. York of WatervilIe, an in
dctment for the burglary of various
articles from the residence of Mrs.
Alex Yates at Waterville, was re-
sumed, County Attorney Hildreth APP
pcaring for the State and Joseph Will
hanson of Augusta for the respondent.
Mrs. Milford p. York, wife of the re-
spondent, called by the State, testified
that the goods came to her house and
her husband told her that he had pur-
chased the stuff in Lewiston
The jury in the case of State versus
Fred Gilbert of Gardiner, in indict-
ment for maintaining a liquor null
sance, returned verdict of not guilty
after a deliberation of half an hour
and the respondent was discharged
Fred W. Clair of Waterville appeared
as counsel for the respondent. At
torney Clair was warmly congratu-
lated for his able presentation for the
defence.
John Silvia of Augusta gave a new
bond to keep out of the liquor business
in this county for two years, the sure
ties being Charles w. Trask and Will
liam S. Knowles of Augusta. Melvin
f. Sawtellc of Augusta appeared as
counsel for the respondent.
No evidence was offered in behalf of
the defence iE the case of State VS..
Milford F. York of Waterville, an IN
dictment for burglary, and the case
was given to the jury at 2.35 O'Clock
and at 8 o'clock a verdict OF guilty was
returned. York was remandcd to Jail
pending sentence.
The next case to be opened to the
Rrann of Gardiner an Indictment for
maintaining a liquor nuisance, Couh-
tv Attorney Hildreth appearing for the
state and Ecanc & Beane of HalloWell
for the respondent.
The first witness called in behali OF
the state was Frank f.. Andrews, city
marshal of Gardiner He testified that
no had accompanied other officers to
the saloon run by the respondent on
Water street in Gardiner. He had
.ean ncople around the door under the
influence of liquor since he became
CITY marshal on May II last
ON cross examination by Attorney
Fred Emery Beane the witness tesu-
fled that no liquors were found by the
officers on the occasion of the search.
He had seen intoxicated persons stand
Ing, in front of buildings in which 1t
was never suspected liquor was sold.
Fred r. Potter of Gardiner, deputy
sheriff. testified that he searched the
RESPONDENTS place twice, but found no
1io,,o, either time. on the occasion OF
the second visit there was man
stretched out on the floor of the bar
room and the place smelled very
strongly of liquor.
ON cross examination the witness
testified that on the occasion of his
second visit to search the place but
two persons were in the place, the re-
snondent and the man who was lying
on the floor.
Questioned by the court, the witness
testified that he saw but one box OF cl-
CARS in the place.
Albert r. Buckln of I.itchfield,
deputy sheriff. testified to searching
the saloon with other officers but dld
not find any liquor there. The shop
smelled very strongly of whiskey
on cross-examination the witness
testified that when the searches were
made at the Brann place he cid not
think that the respondent knew that
tho officers were going to raid the
place.
Frank E. Locke of Gardiner, a spe-
cial officer, testified that he assisted IN
searching the saloon conducted by the
RESPONDENT four different times. NO
,iouor was found at any of the raids.
Continuing. the witness testified that
on tho occa sion of the last search there
was a strong odor of liquor in the back
room.
,,.,. Of Gardiner a conSta-