South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1918-07-10
ACQUITS BAGG,
RESTORES LIQUOR
To DEFENDANT
Judge Gllmer Rules Prima
Facie Case Against Saloon
Man is Rebutted.

Holding that the defense had
completely re0utted the prima facia
evidence that the liquor found in hits
possession was being held Tor sale,
barter. exchange or TO Ice given
away. Judge Gilmer in city court
Wednesday morning found Stanley
II Bagg liz r. Jefferson blvd. not
guilty Of violating the state prOhi-
bition law. and ruled that the defen-
dant should be allowed the future
possession Of the liquor confiscated
hy the police a. the time or his ar
rest.
Bagg was arrested on the night OF
July e by Sergt. Roberts and officer
Devos In city court Wednesday
morning Bagg was defended los
Atty. G. A. Fara0augh
sergt. Roberts testified for the
state that upon passing the former
Bage saloon he saw a truck driver
and Mr. Bagg loading several boxes
and kegs on an auto truck. He said
that ne had Investigated and found
that the boxes and kegs, which were
being taken from the former saloon.
contained liquor
The sergeant testified that he then
placed Mr.. Bagg under arrest and
took the boxes and kegs 10 police
headquarters where they were held
as evidence.
Substantiatcs Testimony.
Cmcer DeNos substautiated the
testimony OF Sergt Roberts They
both testified on direct examination
by Deputy Pros. Schwartz that there
were eight boxes and FIVE kegs. all
containing liquor. They said that the
boxes and kegs were being taken
from the rear OF the Bagg place.
Mr.. Bagg admitted that the liquor
was being taken from his place. lie
testified that on April T., 10 days
after the prohibition law became tef-
fective. ne had shipped all his bulk
LIQUOR. and all complete cases 20
Louisville. Ky. but all ne odds and
ends. such as two partly used kegs,
and bottles out Of which some OF the
whisky had been taken he had
gathered together. and the bottles
he had placed in the boxes and had
stored them in his basement lie
said that ne had done this i'm anti
cipation OF a supreme court decision
declaring the prohibition law uncon-
stitutional He said that If the law
had been declared unconstitutional,
he would have had enough liquor on
hand 10 resume business. and 10 do
him until he could receive a ship
ment.
lie testified that he had closed his
saloon on the night of April .. and
had not reopened it. not even for
the sale OF soft drinks He denied
that ne had the liquor found by the
officers in his possession 90 sell. bar
ter. exchange or TO give away.
Evidence II sbuttcd.
I'm his argument Atty Farahaush
heid that the presumption OF prima
faeia evidence had been completely
rebutted by the defense. and that 80
long a. il is not being held for sale
or barter. exchange or to be- given
away. one can have IN his possession
as much liquor as he desires.
Atty. Farabaugh admitted that
the mere possession of liquor is
prima facia evidence that the pos
then incumbent upon the one having
the liquor 90 rebuilt the prima facia
presumption OF the prohibition law.
Judge Gilmer I'm reviewing the
evidence concurred with ATTY. Fara-
baush. and found the defendant not
guilty
The liquor taken from AIR. Bagg
should be returned 20 him. should
ir NOT" asked Atty. Farabaugh.
lie Is entitled TO possession OF
q. and cnder the evidence do not
believe that he should even have
beeu arrested by the police '
answered Judge Gilmer
When asked after the hearing II
he would allow the liquor taken
from MIR. Bags 10 Dee returned TO
him. Asst chief of Police Cassidy
replied that IL would nave 20 be re-
pIevined from the police before it
would be- allowed 10 so back into
Ar. RasE- possession.