The public ledger. [volume] (Maysville, Ky.) 1913-1968, 1921-08-20
DECISION AGAINST
POGuE'S DISTIlLERY
WILL Be APPEALED
Test Case Is Made Of Pogue Distlllery
Prohibition Litigation and VIII Be
Carried to Federal Pr0hlbl.
tl0n Director.

The case of United States vs.. H. e.
Pogue Distillery Company which has
attracted considerable interest was
called for trial at o'clock on Friday
at the Federal building In Lexington,
Ky. The Government was represented
by Federal Prosecutor Sields, and the
defendant by Hon. Allan D. Cole, The
case involved not only important ques-
tions Of procedure, but also the vital
question Of taking away from the citl-
zen his property aid his liberty with
out due process of law.
The defendants first contention was
that there was no proof in the case
that ten days notice of the original
hearing had been given prior thereto
as required by the statute; and that
therefore, noncompliance with this
mandatory provision rendered pro-
ceedings under the citation illegal.
Second, that although the Prohibi-
ton Director has the right to issue a
citation and conduct trial thereun-
der, he has no right under the statute
in his citation to designate any one
else to try the case; and that, there
fore, his designation Of Judge Elijah
Hogge to conduct the trial in Mays
vile, was arbitrary and illegal.
Third, that the incomplete hearing
conducted by Judge Hogge in Mays
VILE on July 2Sth when the Govern
ment submitted its case on affidayits
became mistrial by reason of the
subsequent expiration Of his term OF
office; and that for this and for the
foregoing reasons new citation
should have been issued.
Fourth, that because of the affidavits
offered by the Government obtained by
its secret service men without notice
to the defendant and with no oppor-
tunity given to defendant to cross-ex-
anime the witnesses could only oper-
ate as information furnishing a basis
upon which to issue a citation; and
that 1t Is an arbitrary exercise Of pow
er In conflict with the Bill or rights
and the Constitution for the Prohibi-
ton Director to use them as substan-
tive evidence instead of requiring
either the personal presence Of the
witnesses or at least their dispositions
to be taken with notice that the time
hcnored and well settled rules of evil
dence may be observed with respect
to relevancy and competency.
Fifth, that the record as made up by
the Government is absolutely devoid
of evidence sufficient to sustain the al
legations of the citation and that the
same should be dismissed.
Sixth, that upon submission of the
case on motion to dismiss the citation
in the absence Of competent evidence
to support'it the defendants should be
allowed a reasonable time to prepare
and file brief with authorities in sup
mort OF its contentious.
However, all the foregoing conten-
tions and motions were overruled by
the Prohibition Director, Collins, who
decided that he would himself try the
case heard by Judge Hogge;- and ac-
cordingly judgment was entered
against defendant, from which defend
ant promptly prayed an appeal to the
Prohibition Commissioner at Wash
ington City.
The governments charges against
the local distillery are that they failed
to give notice Of the sale of the con-
Germ and that alterations have been
made on removal permits.
The penalty inflicted by State Pro-
hibition Director Collins is a revoca-
tion of their permit to sell liquors or
remove the same from their property
and becomes effective Immediately.
Since this test case presents impor-
tant questions of procedure and is
the only case in which defense has
been made, the outcome will be
watched with unusual interest.