Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1917-08-18
TESTIMONY NOW
IS FINISHED in
BREWERY CASES
will Present Argu-
ments Monday Morning be
fore Judge Mclaughlin.

ments Monday Morning be
fore Judge McLoughlin.
II a
Az noon today Assistant Attorney
2 u. A.2Bronson announced In
been held in hesEaat. Grand Forks
Brewery. andaaJs H. McInerny criminal
onspiracy case for more than a week
state submitted as evidence
allfthe testimony which had been pre-
sented. the court, Judge Phil Me-
Loughlinsnthereupon announced that
VIII reconyenes Monday morning
1850 FOR the purpose Of hearing ar
guments in the case. &.
CnHiiton as a League Worker.
When court convened this morning
atsl0:l5,. e.. X. Gown, the detective
VINO mas been working for the state,'
was recalled&as witness by MI.
Bronson. Mr.. GOWN identifede5cer
taln coplesso beer orders which had
not;been incorporated in the. files and
,oooks Of h brewery which are now
81 Qna.such order, read as; follows:
sPaease, giYeathis man q a and
,ohitge, r.. sDaGTucker,'S Ia
: announcer similar beer. order read: 4
Sir oliver to. bearer :. a cask, and
'obige. Joe Scott ',s $3.50. 3
Geo. A. Bangs, counsel for the de-
had q few more questions to
ask. experimenting his> cross-examin-
the witness earlier, in the
week. by a process of elimination
Mr.%Bangs finally had MI. GOWN adj
NIL that on n of his excursions Of
observation. ne s(the .witness) had used
an -automobile which had been Dor
;rowed4 from j.. N. .Culliton, a former
employe: of@the defendant brewery
II appeared that, Mr.. Bronson. had
the arrangements peces-
sarysto borrowsthe automobile seqthat
the detective had no direct negotia-
tions regarding this point.
The Introduction. to Mendt,
Further questioning revealed the
fact that Mr.. gCulliton had introduced
Mr.. Gown to ]. e. Mendt who was
later on induced to accommodate the
detective with signed beer orders. On
three different occasions the witness
had obtained orders from Mendt.
Mr.. GOWN on the stand also testi-
fled that. according to a copy. he had
made Of a part Of the. brewery rec
ords at Fargo. c. L. Evans of this city
had obtained seventeen deliveries Of
beer rom the East Grand Forks
brewery in thesperiod. from July 10 to
July 26. both days inclusive. For
these deliveries Mr.. Evans appeared
to- have paid in all 1855. n y.
What HadeNot Been Done. al
At he~Srequestcof Mr.. Bangs r. L..
Watkins. superintendent Of the North
Dakota acknowledgements league, was
I~Eecalled to the stand to give a few
answers. Mr.; Bangs asked.
@. "Some time prior to the So
called raid in East Grand Forks, I UNI
derstood you to say that you had a
conference with r. B. Griffith. presi-
that %correct?"
A.. Yes, SIR
Q. Now Mr.. Watkins. did, Mr..
Griffith on that occasion give you a
check for 5000 to aid you in your
operations? !" a !
A. "He did"
O.. 1T appears from a part of the
testimony already given that Mr.. Nc
Inerny ceased making Grand Forks
deliveries some time early this, spring,
at the suggestion of States. Attorney
r., b. Elton. Is that your. impress
sion?"
O.. Until you began your investi-
|gations of the brewery affairs, had
you been aware of this fact?"
"A. THAT question had never been
raised in my mind until the day OF
the raid
~ esst"In other words, Mr.. Watkins,
despite the fact that your observa-
lions and Investigations were rather
thorough you had not ascertained
and determined the fact that no beer
deliveries were made in this city by
Mr. McInerny?"
NO, sir. not prior to- the &C.
tual beginning of this CASE"
q. ibid you on one occasion write
Ito MI. Burtness, then, state,ss' attor.
ney, or to Mr.. Elton complaining o,
the rafic Of the brewery 2'l.@.
A. Il don't remember that I did,
Q. I'm other words, o had In nj
manner complained to the local Off.
GERS Of the situation prevailing here
within the last rear. or SO y"
A. II wrote to MI. Elton thil
spring without making any referenc,
to the brewery"
Testimony Completed.
5 At this point Mr.. Bronson read
letter written to MI. Elton from Cali
: Efornia regarding the probability o
prosecution of the brewery. Mr.. Nc
Inerny asked the states attorney t
!, defer any proceedings until after, tn
! rendering of. a certain. decision by
MINNESOTA court. i
In aTgeneral way the letter 4admon
il4ished Mr.. Elton tof9be- unbiased AM
7 fair. land said among other things:
{ you should be ab~leato9look an,
man in the face and tell him to g
Ito II" @f ~
Bronson Had Not Represented tn
Z z Schmidt Company.
: Mr.. Bronson wanted 1t read into tn
record that while Mr. Culliton wa
!. connected with the Schmidt rewin
company, he, Bronson. had never rep
9 tresentedsthat company In anySactior
He had been, counsel for Mr. Cullitor
but.only ina private capacity.
Mr. Bronson also read into the rec
3 ord the substance of the Polk county
Z Minnesota,T prohibition laws. and de
--fsired the fcourtEto take judicial M
Z tice gof the act known as the Webb
9 Kenyon law. The textaof the social
esEed@federal bone dryslawfwass also rea
I-Iinto the recordssand then Mr.. Bron
2 Esonson announced that the state he
finished. tI.s
Defendants Have No Witnesses
!, Mr.. Bangs said that the defendant
had.no testimony to- offer. andacalle
Y about 46.5morea cases pending In col
Injection with the brewery case. M
y bangs suggested that the testimon
ItakenSin the preliminary hearing (
= the conspiracy casegbe utilized In til
= Eothers cases So as to save labor an
J. Traditional expenditures. He though
g that alfrtestimony should be take
Z immediately so as to expedite matter
Upon announcement by Mr.&Bant
y that he was not prepared to sargr
6 before the court this afternoon, q
jonrnmentsSt oolisplace until Monde
Emnrning at 9s30gwhensthe argHinen
WILL be heard. vssss w 8Msss
The preliminary hearing has occ,
pied every day since August n g,