|
|
|
MailTribune.com
  • March 27, 1913

  • Demurrers to the complaint against the 10 Medford saloonmen, indicted for selling liquor to minors, were filed this afternoon in the circuit court by attorneys Reames and Withington who represent the indicted men. The demurrer will be argued at an early date, and if overruled, the trials will follow shortly after.
    • email print
  • Demurrers to the complaint against the 10 Medford saloonmen, indicted for selling liquor to minors, were filed this afternoon in the circuit court by attorneys Reames and Withington who represent the indicted men. The demurrer will be argued at an early date, and if overruled, the trials will follow shortly after.
    The attorneys for the defense are making an effort to stipulate with the district attorney in order to try one of the cases and in this matter decide them all as the same legal questions arise in each. The matter will be determined this afternoon.
    u
    Charging point blank that Mayor Eifert is manifestly unfair and prejudiced in his rulings on the admissability of evidence in the case of the city vs. George H. Millar, for immoral conduct, Attorney Gus Newbury for the defense at this morning's session of the court served notice of motions asking for a change of venue. He asked time to prepare such a motion, which was promptly denied by the mayor. He then stated that he would do so at his earliest opportunity.
    Newberry's charge that the court was manifestly unfair and prejudiced followed the overruling of a motion offered by Newberry to strike out all of the evidence submitted by City Attorney Boggs as to Millar's method of conducting the Manhattan Cafe, on the ground that it was in no way connected with the Royal Rooming House or with any immoral conduct on the part of Millar. Newbury cited supreme court decisions as to such evidence, stating that it would not, in any court of law be admitted.
Reader Reaction
      • calendar