Great Falls tribune. [volume] (Great Falls, Mont.) 1921-current, 1922-06-27

Brewing company, attorneys for the
brewery Monday asked for dismissal
of the search and seizure proceedings
on grounds that Eugene Van Vert,
head of the state law enforcement de-
partment, by reason of his conviction
in Iowa on a bribery charge and sub
sequent loss of civil rights, was not
a legal and qualified officer when he
seized the brewery on June 8.
This motion of the defense to throw
the proceeding out of court was quick
ly overruled by Judge J.. b. Leslie.
The court ruled that ~sustainment of
the motion would be tantamount to
removing Van Vert from office, an
act which could not be carried out
except under separate an distinct
custer proceedings.
Qualification Not Issue
Il don't think there is much merit
in the notion said Judge Leslie.
'We cannot 60 into the question of
the qualification of the officer. The
question has not been raised as to
whether his appointment was regular
and | know nothing of his credentials.
J u0NC dSsuLltus as nv HutStiSh 49,
not been raised, that Mr.. Van Vert
is a properly appointed and acting of
ficer. Whether he is qualified to act
or not l no not know.
whether Mr.. Van Vert was con-
victed or not, it does not affect this
matter one way or another. | don
think the facts set forth concerning
the conviction can be zone into in
this case. We will try hat when the
main issue comes before the court.
There may not be word of truth in
the affidavit which has beer intro
duced in regard to Mr.. Van Vert
Admits Jail Term
The information setting forth that
Mr.. Van Vert was convicted in fed
eral court in Jones County, Iowa,
December 2, 1914, for bribery and had
served three months in Jail and paid
a fine of $500, was contained in an
affidavit submitted by Attorney George
Hurd, one of the attorneys for the
defense. Mr.. Van Vert, who was the
first state witness called to the stand,
admitted the truth of the information
without any evasion or hedging.
Under cross examination by Mr..
HUrd as to whether he had advised
the attorney generals office at the
time of his appointment about his
conviction. Mr.. Van Vert said that
matter was not discussed. He said
that former Attorney General 5. G..
Ford knew of it and that the present
attorney general learned of il after
his appOintm ent. The question of Mr..
Van Vert being deprived of his civil
rights as a result Of the conviction
was raised by Mr.. Hurd. but the wit
ness said that it was his understand
ing that the penalty carried with it
only the provision that he could not
again hold a federal office.
Says Civil Rights Held
Mr.. Van Vert said his conviction
grew out of a liquor case very similar
to the brewery hearing. He testified
that his case had beer in the courts
for -four of five years. When asked
whether he had voted in the state
election following his appointment Mr..
Van Vert replied that he had. He
said it was his understanding that,
under the laws of the state, that a
person must receive n state peniten-
tiary sentence or convicting on a
felony charge, such as bribery, and
added that such a sentence had not
been given in his case. He cited this
as proof that he retained his civil
rights in Montana.
After the conviction episode had
been gone into thoroughly by the de-
Tense counsel. despite the frequent
objections of the state, Mr.. Van Vert
was questioned in regard to the seiz-
ure of the brewery and its equipment.
He told of the taking of bottles of
liquor from the bottling plant of the
brewery and taking them to DR..
Thomas Walker for analysis. He
further testified that he had purchased
a case of alleged beer from the brew
cry several hours before the seizure.
This sale was denied in an affidavit
signed by Walter Ii. Jenson, one Of
the proprietors Of the brewery, and
offered in support of the motion to
dismiss the proceedings.
Say They Bought Beer"
The testimony of Mr.. Van Vert was
followed by the cross-examination OF
Fred A. Brady, "A state enforcement
officer, and John Ii. Metcalf, a federal
internal revenue officer. The state
officers testimony dealt with pur
chases he said he had made in a Great
featured and sold by by the Montana
Brewing company. Mr.. Metcalf also
testified along the same line.
DR.. Walker, the states most mate
rial witness. was the next called to the
stand. He identified "a dozen bottles
of liquid as having been brought to his
office for analysis. Some of the LIQUID,
he said, tested as high as 400 per
cent alcohol while more of the product,
taken on the day following the seizure,
ran only to &c per cent alcohol. When
the defense counsel was questioning
DIR. Walker, it was evident that an
effort was being made 10 show that
the bottles taken to the doctors office
for analysis. had been tempered with
between the time he received it and
when the product was tested.
Denies Bottles Tempered With
The witness, however. was emphatic
in his assertion that the bottles were
not open when he received them. He
said he would know if they had been
tempered with or if his office had been
entered. He admitted in answer to
questions asked by the counsel for the
defense that some of the product was
not analysed until 20 hours after he
had received it. He also explained the
method by which he arrived at the
alcoholic content of the liquor.
1t was near the close of the days
session when Bartol Pippinich and
Charles Watson, both soft drink par
lor proprietors, were called to the !
stand to testify that they had pur-
chased the products of the Montana