The Mankato free press., 1921-12-30
MILLER IS SEEKING
DOLLARS OF R[IIER
Case Wherein Selling OF
Liquor Cuts Figure
ECHO OF BOOZE DAYS
Mayor Would Not Sign License
Hence Action In District
#- Court Now

Rochester, Mimi, December "a
Early objections by the defense and
efforts on the part of the plaintiff to
introduce testimony showing dam :
age and loss due to the closing OF the
saloon, marked the opening in district
court of the suit OF George Miller
versus julius j. Reiter. The case,
which introduces new angle in the
we'll known 1918 license controversy,
involves sum of $4,000, the amount
of damages Mr.. Miller claims as re-
suit of being unable to operate his
saloon between April 13 and August
5, 1918.
The dispute first arose in 1918 when
Mr.. Reiter, who was then mayor OF
Rochester, refused TO sign number
by rhe council. The case came be
fore the district court, and Mr.. Reiter
was ordered to sign. He signed all
the licenses except the Miller license.
The case went to the supreme court
and the district courts decision was
affirmed by that body At that time
Reiter was ordered 10 give bond. and
he did. This action is being brought
against Mr.. Reiter and the signers OF
his bond. among whori are Mrs.
Mosse, James Spencer, A. E. Gates.
W. A. Johnson and Mrs. Van Dusen.
Mr.. Miller contends that he lost
- ''o-~','o .-'~'ro4s d'rrine the time
he was forced to remain idle.
First Legal Snae.
The first legal snag in the case
cai.e ...is mCI.lInS shortly after the
PLAINTIFFS attorneys had opened their
argument. The defense entered OBJ
lection to the proceedings upon the
ground that the bond was not in legal
compliance The objection was over
ruled, and the trial proceeded.
The first witness called by the
plaintiff was George S. Harmon, clerk
Of district court, through whom sew
eral documents in previous proceed
inss were introduced. Some of the
exhibits were objected to, but the OBJ
iections were overruled by the judge.
The second witness was George
Miller, plaintiff lin the case. He was
Dut on the stand to testify as to the
amount OF damage done by the clos
of the place: On his behalf a small
memorandum book was introduced "a
svidence. The book contained infor-
nation concerning his profits and
business from January until March.
and from September until the end o,
the year, in 1918. The defense OBJ
IpCUSu 10 the cXNlDlL DtlJ TNe OplecIlOn
was overruled. The plaintiff then in
troduced memoranda. summing uD
the ipformation contained in the
book. .This was also objected to AMI
the objection was sustained bv I-Id~e
'Callaghan. on the grounds that the
memoranda was complied after the
action to sue had Deen fled.
Presented Some Figures.
Shortly before noon the plaintiffs
attorney, with Miller on the witness
stand. began to present to the jury
the figures ehc>-.-- the condition cf
the business during the year part of
which his saloon remained closed.
The case is probably tire most in
teresting, in view of previous han
penings to the same dispute. in the
nresent calendar. and will undoubted-
ly occupy all the remainder Of the
week for trial.
The jury, which was chosen earlv
this mornine. was as follows: Robert
Forester, George Berkins. G. H.
Schwock Timothy Redmond, TT1omas
Parkin, P. S. Paulson J. ]. Scherer.
George Toogood. Claude Ostrur1
Charles Reifsnider, Louis Hammel,
and Lawrence O'Neil.
Considerable difficulty was exueri-
enced in drawing no a satisfactory
Jury, owing to the fact that the case
&c ovcaoSiuOi uro11 L