Evening star., 1923-10-31
LIQUOR KNOWLEDGE
DENIED BY DAVIS
Continued from First Page.)
been given to Commissioner Oyster I'M
mediately after he received them.
Former Agent TestlfeS.

been given to Commissioner Oyster i'm
mediately after he received them.
Former Agent Testines.
]. H. Tilton, former prohibition
agent, who was summoned here from
Hagerstown, Nd, to testify, was
questioned as to whether he had per-
sonal knowledge that in the first
week of June, 1928, Ralph E. Ruby
as a prohibition agent was so distrib-
uting other agents and police as to
facilitate bringing Illicit liquor into
the District. Witness denied it.
He testified. however. that Lieut..
Davis had told him that Ruby was
assisting 'bootleggers" to bring
liquor into Washington for Shrine
runners on which roads the agents
would be on, so that they might avoid
them.
The charge under hearing is that
Lieut.. Davis knew such a practice
was in existence, but took no action.
Says Action Intended.
Tilton said Davis had talked to him
times. but added he. Davis. said he
had taken no action, but he intended
to do so. This was some time prior
to June.
Attorney T. Morris Wampler repre-
senting Davis, took the witness in
cross examination. Tilton then stated
that Davis had expressed the above
charges to him as a personal opinion,
but not as a known fact.
Under examination on another
specification Tilton said Davis had
charged that certain agents had been
told by Ruby to patrol the Baltimore
pike, who switched. against Ruby's
orders, to the Leonardtown pike,
thereby catching three bootleggers.
AS result Of this catch. Davis said.
according to witness, Ruby caused
the transfer of an agent to South
Carolina. Witness declared Davis
had assured him he would take action
when the time came"-when Con-
greSS met.
Challenged as "Opinion."
Questions of Wampler again sought
to establish that such statements
from Davis were given as an opinion.
Tilton declared that Davis simply
said these things as direct state
ment, but that Davis did not say he
possessed knowledge of this as
fact.
Under the specification charging
Davis with knowledge of Ruby be-
ing a "bootlegger" and failing to act.
Tt9n ,6 on stsssd direct fSs1 Rh0
he was prohibition agent. was
running liquor"
"He said" witness testified. that
Ruby had previously been notorious
occasionally running it in"
On DISCRIMINATION by Attorney
Wampler, witness admitted that such
statements were not declarations OF ac-
tual knowledge. but he made them as
an "observation." The reason he, as a
dry agent, did not take action when
Davis told him of this. Tilton said, was
that he knew of ''the hearty dislike
Davis had for Ruby.
The case moved on slowly to
rSt nav a
vice squad lieutenant knew George
Fowler, as dry agent. ran car
with liquor into the District and fail
ed to turn over car and liquor to
authorities.
Wamplor, in a grilling cross-ques-
tioning, asked the witness whether
he reported statements such as at
tributed to Davis to his superiors.
that he thought it was up" to Lieut.
Davis to take action. The procedure
was greatly parallel to that in the
former specifications this morning.
An attempt to break down allega-
tions regarding Bauers alleged as
sault upon l.. r. Porter at 1927 18th
street last March 81, was made by
the defense late yesterday afternoon.
Attorney T. Morris Wampler went
to work systematically to tear the
prosecutions evidence to pieces. First
he produced Joseph c. Mallon. who
declared he made the buy" which
resulted IN the Td1u, anu teStlleu ne
was with Bauer all the time during
the raid and saw no assault.
Deny Move to Hip.
Then the defense went after the
allegation that Bauer motioned to-
ward his right hip in an attitude of
drawing a revolver Bauer, called to
the stand. showed that he was left
handed and carried his revolver in
holster at his left hip.
Other witnesses were produced who
gave similar testimony.
Wampler started a series of ques-
tions which brought testimony that
there was a fight at that address on
the night of the raid between George
Fowler. jr., there as a prohibition
agent, and another resident. Fowler
himself testified that he had repelled
an attack upon himself by a blow.
A man came at him with an upraised
bottle to bean" him, he testified, and
he was forced to act in self-defense.
Defense counsel sought to show
that this was the fight to which Por-
ter had reference when he said Bauer
struck him. Porter denied it, and
positively identified Bauer as the man
who knocked" him across the room.