Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1923-11-17

any place for Intoxicating liquors;
makes 1t the duty of officers to libel
liquor seized. and prohibits and pro-
vides penalties for the illegal trans
portation Of liquors.
These, think, cover practically
the laws usually spoken of as the
prohibitory law and those which
diligently and faithfully inquire into
and enforce, and the complaint here
is that Sheriff Wescott has not faith-
fully or efficiently performed those
duties.
1.-THE charge is laid not jas of one
date, but as of the third day Of jan
uary, 1921, and divers other days and
times between that day and the day
of the making Of this complaint.
1T Is. charge of non-feasance,
which is defined as AN omission of
performance of required duty: the
omission of an act which a person
ought to do
"The amendment under which
these proceedings are held does not
require that a sheriff in order to be
removed must be guilty of non-f eas-
ance as described iIi Section 40 OF
Chapter 127 of the Revised Statutes,
that is, be guilty of wilful or corrupt
refusal or neglect to perform his du-
ties but only requires that he shall be
proven to be inefficient or unfaithful
in the performance of his duties.
Zone definition of faithful is:
Firm in adherence to promise, oaths,
etc. while the word efficient Is de-
fined as characterized by energetic
and useful activity; not inactive,
slack or incapable, as an efficient
officer
"a sheriff may be e.er so honest;
he may be faithful and try his best to
enforce the law, still if for any rea-
son, his work is not e1jcient, does not
produce results, does not measure up
to that degree of efficiency which the
governor and council may deem
necessary for the good of the State
and the protection of our citizens,
then it is within their power and the
law contemplates the use of such
power, to remove such 1nethcient
sheriff and appoint one who will be
not only faithful but efficient.
THE claim in his case Is that
Sheriff Wescott has been both un-
faithful and inefficient; that he has
not firmly adhered to his oath OF
office and to the duties imposed upon
him by law, and that he has not been
and is not efficient in the enforce
ment 'of the prohibitory law.
: IF adjudged by you guilty OF
either one or both Of these charges,
he may be remoTed by the governor.
ITO substantiate these charges. we
expect to produce evidence 20 show
that for a long time covering the
period alleged in the complaint there
were Wholesale violations or the pro
hibitory law in Hancock county; that
Bar Harbor and the adjoining towns
| were the headquarters of a gang OF
law breakers who were open in their
defiance OF the law; that their illegal
business was common knowledge in
the community; that they imported
sold and transported liquor in large
quantities without molestation by or
fear of the sheriff or his deputies;
that this went on for months AND
was only stopped when Daniel Hern-
nv and several others were caught py
| the federal officers, convicted ano
I sentenced to various terms in federal
and State prisons for tteir otfences
against the federal liquor laws.
| "The duty of sheriff does not enc
when ne appoints his deputies. Inc
| duty of enforcing the law IN ms
county is his duty, the responsibility
of which cannot be delegated to depu-
| ties. and it is the duty of sherifi
not only to appoint eff cent men as
deputies. but to see oy personal OIL
rection. contact and oversight thai
they do efficient work. and II not. &c
remove them and appoint those Wh'
| will L.
| I'm this connection, We expect &c
! show that Sheriff Woscott had Dti'
one deputy at Bar Harbor; that tne
deputy, Mr.. Clark, was not active on
| apparently much concerned about tnt
enforcement of the prohibitory la"
that | g habitually frequented the sa :
loon called a club run by Daniel
| Herlihv with whom he appeared te
he on very friendly terms, and thai
he as we'll as Sheriff Wescott at diff
ferent times wore known to nave
been supplied with liquor there ana
! to have carried it away. Aithougn
Dor Harbor is only 10 miles from
ellsworth. the Official residence OF
| sheriff Wescott, he has been there
very seldom and has apparently TAX
on little interest in what his deput!
was doing, or whether the la" was
being enforced. 49,,
1--WE expect to show further Una.
because of the apparent indlHerehe -
of Sheriff Wescott and his deputy u
Tho 1awless condition. the good people
Who otherwise would have made
comnaints in many instances did no.
| do so because they had no faltn III
| the officers! ~. :. ,os
ave expect to prove that It Was
the belief and understanding OF lhose
! associated in the liquor business VIII
Do Mol Herlihv that they had nothlns
to fear from Sheriff Wescott or Dep
uty Clark, and that they took no pre-
| caution to avoid them "hen Trans
| porting liquor. ,;o;na,
| courts and the testimony OF tnt
iudges will be offered to show a snlai
number of prosecutions wnlch nav
been instituted by the omcers.
ave shall show by many goo.
citizens of the county that conditlons
as to drunkenness AMI non
wont of the law h We been PAD 0nI
that in their opinion the law mas no
been effectively enforced.
awe expect to prove by an 1nvesu,
| GATOR sent from the attorney general
| office that a good deal OF liquor l:
now being sold in Hancock county
and that It is comparatively easy U
nrocure it. and the liquor bought o'
him will be offered in evidence.
"And unon these facts. II proVeu
.nd such other facts as may w
! moved. YOU are to determine as
matter of fact whethL" Shenn Yves.
coft has or has not faithtuilv ant
| efficientlv performed his duties.
So Witnesses Called by Gen. Shaw
Atty. Gen. Shaw called 81 witness,
| Az oath WAS administered