New Britain herald., 1929-04-13
WOODS T0PADL0CK
 STORE 0N AVENUE
Johnson Fined StM and Jen.
 nings Found Not Guilty

G. Woods, who recommended that Bior Johnson, 40, of 70 John street. be bound over to superior court m S1,000 bonds as second offender against the liquor laws. Judge Stan- police court today and fined John son $150 and costs with jail sen- tence of 15 days. Johnson did not take the witness stand after testi- mony as to his connection with place at 36 Hartford avenue had been offered by the police. and Judge Traceski, commenting on the prosecuting attorneys recommenda- tion for a bind over, said there was liquor case i'll court few days ago and no recommendation for passing it on to superior court was made al- though the circumstances in that in- stance were quite similar to those Tn the Johnson case.
 Prosecuting Attorney Woods re- piled that the place where Johnson was arrested on April is an old saloon at 36 Hartford avenue. while the scene of the other violation is a store where cider was sold. Although : not mentioned by name, the refer ence was to the Passinisi store at 112 Hartford avenue.
 Numerous convictions have been obtained against the place at 36 Hartford avenue, Mi. Woods said, to which Attorney Harry M. Gins burg retorted that the state has i.s remedy if it wishes to use 1t. Mr. Woods asserted that it would not be used again to violate the liquor law, and after court, in reply to an in quiry as to whether he intended to institute paddock proceedings. he declared he would certainly do so. "I will start right away he said
 That place will be closed up tight '
 Jennings Not Guilty
 Edward Jennings, 26, of 5 s Dew " street, who was arrested on Hart
 ford avenue and charged with Nio- lating the liquor law in the place, was discharged. Attorney Glnsburg.
 after the states case was in, moved
 for this disposition of the case, say ing Jennings had not been connect
 ed with the place by the police, and Judge Traceski. granting the mo-
 ton, said the state had "clearly fah-
 ed 10 show that he was the propri-
 etor." After court. Johnson gave notice of an appeal and $500 bonds
 were posted. It was indicated. how
 ever, that the appeal will probably be vacated before the next term ol superior court.
 13S Bottles of Beer Found Sergeant P. J. O'Mara, Officers J M. Liebler. l.. B. kicly. A. C. Wal, , inczus and Daniel J. Cosgrove testi- fed for he state. The sergeant, ac-
 companied by Officers Liebler and
 kiely went to the place on April 5 they testified. and took out l3S bot ) ties of home brew. quantity o1 malt. sugar. a bottle capping ma chine and similar equipment. bu' : left some tubs of beer in the mak'
 ing. They had a warrant for An l thonv Matulis of East Main street 1 but were unable to locate him. They } arrested Johnson, who was tending bar. and who admitted that beel } was made on the premises and soif
 for 15 cents a bottle. One young l man was intoxicated in the place { while the raid was being made, bu
 he was not arrested
 9 Sergeant C'Mara testified that h. . had compl"ints from policemen S about the place. and Officers klel!
 I ;.l ,n nf II O and about the premises. under tn !. influence of liouor. Offlc"f 1\lel. n said he kneu liquor vas sold there N but questioned by Judge Tracesk' h. admitted 1t was 1earsay. Tt l d Impossible to get it U he said. am II Judge Tracesti wanted to kno' whether he meant it was imposslbi :, 10 buy if or ind it. The officer re o piled that he meant it vas impossl
 ble to g.t t as evidence The
 YOU admit they are too smart 10 l. you"' Attorney Ginsburg asked l. and the officer replied: ''They'r l. smart all right
 Judge Questions Police
 Judge Traceski cross examined in
 police witnesses very closely. askin .v why the warrant, which was isue II on February 20, was not used UT le til April s. Officers kiely and Liet 70 Ter replied that they did not haN l. occasion to use it in the meantim s' Officer Cosgrove told of seeil something served over the bar q, glasses as he looked into the pla' ld J,,. hn oI ii c in reply to Judge Traceski. that l VI could not tell the difference betwee
 beer and near beer at a glance. ~ Officer Walinczus told of arres ,o ing man who was carrying Do - tie on Sunday, q week before East ,a Sunday. He had information that Il
 man was the bottle totcr for il q, place at SC Hartford avenue. 1T i'd case was not pressed in court, b is cause Of lack of evidence. Asked h. Attorney Ginsburg whether or n il he had threatened to "clean up Il
 whole block" Officer WalincZus sa
 he had requested Jennings not
 do business on Sunday in the plae t. but he had never threatened ~ cleanup"
 a, "IiquOr" Ruled Out ..a Prosecuting Attorney Woods sa ,s, the police had bottles with traces m liquor in them, which they h; ,g. seized in the place. Judge Traces on said the testimony about liquor W al hearsay and he would disregard nd Attorney Ginsburg remarked tn to the police were attempting to bui
 up a strong case by mentioning
 quor (which is their custom" T
 chemical analysis of the beer talk
 in the raid was 224 per cent eS volume and IFS per cent by welg DIV in one instance. and 2.30 per ce ne by volume and 1,S3 per cent
 weight in another.