Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1920-04-05
| SACRAMENTO Wines
SEIZED ARE ORDERED
RETURNED Randolph PARTY

Us6 Ou1O1l1IU
RETURNED RANDOLPH PARTY
len gallons of wine seized Friday nv
Deputy Sheriff Robinson from Ludwig
aoioS'eln' % Undertook street, Ran
uoipn' was ordered returned after the
nearing before Judge Atkins in the mn.
hieipal court Saturday forenoon. The
"a. was one OF the most interesting
neio IN this court for many months
ana the courtroom was filed with inter-
eo'eu spectators. Judge Atkins in civ.
ing MS decision closed with the follow
ing sentence: ut must not be adindped
from my decision in this matter that all
liquors ordered for sacramental mr.
poses are not subject to seizure. Each
case must of necessity rest upon the
circumstances and facts connected with
| it," Will
MI. Goldstein. who from the testirnony
presented would appear to be the duty
authorized minister of the congresation
temple israel in Gardiner, had fulfilled
an the requirements of the federal au-
tnorities and had ordered the wine ..for
sacramento purposes only"
| Inc respondent was represented bv
non. George w. Heselton and the inter.
! esl ol the state was cared for by Coun-
| " Attorney Walter Sanborn of Augusta
The first witness was DEPUTY, Robin
son, who stated that Goldstein had told
MN he was going to order some wine
'n" was told that if he did SO and it
came ne should seize it. He stated that
Holdstein lived in Randolph, conducted
! grocery business in Gardiner, and that
the packages came addressed to +.
Goldstein, Depot Square, Gardiner He
stated that the papers Goldstein pro-
cured We're not good. as there was but
one man in Maine who could give suc,
papers. and that was James Perkins of
Bath.
At this point Attorney Heselton said
that under the testimony he might
properly request that the respondent he
! discharged as there had been no evil
dence introduced that tended to show
mat the wine in question was intended
LOT sale. He stated that it was not
MS purpose to rest at this point as he
intended to see if the State had the right
10 interfere with the right of the Jew
: ish people in following a religious Gus
tom established some COCO years ago.
when the Jews were wearing silks and
our ancestors were going about clad in
the SKINS of beasts. He called Mark
Shapiro. president of the Congregation
Israel. MIR. Shapiro told the story of
! the Jewish passover and how necessary
the use of wine was in it's observance.
ha "a y,
drank but that custom required that
some be spilled. while the family gath
cred around the table. Cross examined
by County Attorney Sanborn, he said
TIE Congregation Israel had a regular
place Of worship IN Il hall in the Good
speed block. Gardiner. that he was rres-
I ldent of the congregation and that Lud-
wing Goldstein was the duly appointed
minister of the congregation and rec
ognized as such.
The defense then called III. S. Dav
of the Inter- revenue service. who
{ was shown the papers secured by
/ Mr. Goldstein in order that he might
have the wine come, and said that
all the requirements of the federal
law had been complied with He
stated that James Perkins had been
appointed as Federal Prohibition Of
! ficer but had not yet assumed the
| duties of his Office, and further that
until he did SO Collector Leon Tib-
belts was performing some of the
| functions, and that the giving of the
papers in question was one of these
| duties.
| IN, 11,n e,fo !
! that he had gone strictly according
to the law; that the wine was to
| be used for sacramento purposes
| only; that it was not intended for
sale or for tipping purposes. He
further stated that the wine was to
be distributed to q number of fam
lilies of the congregation, each pay
! ing his proportionate part Of the
| cost of the wine plus the carriage.
Cross examined he said that he did
not solicit the orders for the wine.
Attorney Heselton made brilliant
| closing argument, saying that the
case came within the jurisdiction of
| the court and that under the search
and seizure warrant under which the
confiscation was made, it must be
shown that the wine was intoxicat-
ing, and that it was intended for
sale in violation of the laws of the
State. None of these had been done.
He argued that the prohibition law
was never intended to strike at the
customs of q religious organization
that had been handed down through
the ages. and that the State had
utterly failed to show that the wine
! was intended for illegal purposes,
and that it i'll behdoved the State
to attack a weak religious organiZa-
ton for the purpose of following the
letter Of the law. He did not wish
to be placed in the position CT ask
| ing that these seized wines should
be returned.
County Attorney Sanborn made
an equally brilliant plea, opening by
stating that it was not the purpose
of the county officials to interfere
! with the religious services or GUS
toms of any Of it's people. There
had been so much stir of late about
1;o,or coming in this way that 1t