He was fined on the reputation count,
but decided to contest the destruction
of his cider, which was °eized and
taken away by the raiding officers
The hearing to determine whether
the cider should be declared a nuis
ance an ordered destroyed came up
before Judge M. H. Geissler in the
city court Thursday morning. Prose
cuting Attorney Ernest C. Morse ap
peared for the state and Attorney Ar
thur G. Macdonald represented Mr.
Wright’s interests.
Mr. Morse introduced a communica
tion from a state chemist tc whom
samples of the cider were sent for an
alysis and this report showed that
the different barrels of cider ranged
iD alcoholic consent from four and a
fraction per cent, to five and a frac
tion.
The cider was seized December 11,
and Attorney Macdonald contended
that the tests for alcoholic content
were not made until two weeks after
the cider was seized, so the report
c ould not be regarded as accurately
showing how much alcohol the cider
contained at the thne it was taken
from and out of Mr. Wright's posses
sion; that the report did not definite
ly establish that the cider was fer
mented at the time ol the seizure.
Attorney Macdonald further argued
that no specific intent to sell the ci
der had been shown and that it is not
contrary to law for one to possess
even fermented cider so long as it
is. not offered for sale.
Judge Geissler ruled that the cider
should be returned to Mr. Wright.
The six barrels of the liquid therefore
will be returned at the expense of the
city.
As no one appeared to claim the
grain alcohol and other intoxicants
that were seized in other raids made
on December 11, the court ordered
that these be destroyed.
