#blindpigging

“Aldermen To Work Out The Blind Pig Problem,” Cobalt Daily Nugget. April 20, 1911. Page 01. ---- Mayor Against Employing Spotters - Alderman Jacobson Suggested $50 Bargain ---- ‘I’m dead against employing spotters,’ said Mayor White at the Council meeting last night. ‘If the police do their duty there should be no need of spotters.’

‘It’s the policy of the Provincial Government ---.’ Ald. Rodd commenced to say.

‘But that doesn’t say it’s good,’ retorted the Mayor.

Alderman Barton said that whatever legitimate arrangements could be made in regard to the handling of blind pigs, should be made and the town should get any benefits.

‘All you have to do is to make a bargain with the blind piggers to come to the town hall and pay $50,’ said Ald. Jacobson.

“Charges Against Some Constables,” Toronto Globe. January 13, 1911. Page 07. ---- ALLEGED FAVORITISM SHOWN TO CERTAIN DISPENSERS OF ARDENT SPIRITS IN NORTH ---- (Special Despatch to The Globe.) North Bay, Jan. 12 - Mr. J. E. Rogers, Chief of the Ontario Provincial Police, will attend the trials of many ‘blind piggers’ in Cobalt and other northern towns rounded up by Pinkerton detectives. However, the ‘blind pig’ aspect of the case is not the magnet which has drawn the Chief of the Provincial Police to Cobalt today. The Pinkertons not only have secured evidence against illicit dispensers of booze, but have laid serious charges against a number of Provincial Police for alleged neglect of duty, and it is said that in some instances the charges go much father.

The fact that the Pinkertons have laid charges against a number of alleged violators of the license act, who have been hitherto immune from prosecution, may be regarded as significant. The activities of the Pinkerton have been widely diffused. It is reported that the charges affect the highest as well as the lowest officials in the northern police service. Just at present the Pinkertons are decidedly by unpopular in the north, especially with the constables, although a general denial is made of wrongdoing.

“Huge Increase In Blind Pig Convictions, Annual Police Report Indicates,” The Porcupine Advance (Timmins). January 25, 1940. Page 6.  ---- Number of Illicit Liquor and Gaming Convictions Increased, No Increase in Juvenile Delinquency. Chief of Police Feels Special Effort Should be Made in 1940 to Improve Situation. Feel Traffic Safety Can be Obtained Only Through Teaching --- Chief of Police Leo. H. Gagnon presented his annual report to the Board of Police Commissioners when it met this year for the first time, on Tuesday evening. Present at the meeting was Judge Rene Danis, newly appointed judge for the District of Cochrane.

“Total of Six Months is Given on Liquor Counts,” The Porcupine Advance (Timmins). February 1, 1940. Section 2, page 1. ---- Two Men Each Get Sentence of Three Months Following Convictions. Magistrate Terms Evidence of One Witness ‘One of the Fanciest Stories’ He Has Heard. Says Set-Up Same as in 99 Out of 100 Blind Pigs. ---- A total of six months was handed out by Magistrate Atkinson in police court yesterday following two convictions in charges of keeping liquor for sale. men who will each serve three months in jail at Haileybury are Donat Pilon and James Sawosz.

Pilon pleaded guilty and police said that when they entered his place at 1:00 a.m. there were four taxi drivers and four women inside. All were drinking beer. twenty-five pints of beer and a part bottle of whiskey were seized.

The case of Sawosz was more involved.

Police Sergeant DesRoches said that he and two men visited 72 Mountjoy Street, south, at about 2:30 a.m. on the morning of January 21. There were three persons in the kitchen drinking, one of whom was a woman. Sawosz admitted that he had supplied the beer but said that it belonged to ‘The Boss.’ In return he got room, board and a little spending money.

Police said that, Sawosz had $25 in bills and $2.48 in change in his possession when he was arrested.

Evidence given by two police officers, Constable Thompson and Atkinson, was similar to that of Sergeant DesRoches.

First witness for the defence, Alex Chaputski, said that he and a friend and a lady went to the show on Saturday night. They ate at a restaurant and then went to 72 Montjoy in order that he might get some ‘dry goods’ he had left in the room of one of the eighteen persons who had rooms there.

He met Sawosz in the hall when he was looking for the roomer who had his ‘dry goods’ and he asked him and his friends to come downstairs and have a bottle of beer. They had just one round when the police made their call.

Chaputski denied that he took the police sergeant aside and said to him that he knew as well as did the police what ‘was going on there’ but to go easy because he did not want to lose his job.

Edward Smith said that Sawosz was drunk. He had had two water glasses of whiskey at a party earlier in the evening in the room of one of the men who lived there. During the party two forty-ounce bottles of liquor had been consumed.

The beer belonged to Nick Lulcowich, said Sawosz when he testified on his own behalf. He said that he had no permission to sell it but that he was ‘feeling good’ after the two glasses of whiskey and thought it would be allright.

‘The Bopss’ who turned out to be Nick Lulkowich, said that he came to the police station to see why they had Sawosz locked up and police put him in jail on a keeping for sale charge. He said that he had given Sawosz no permission to either give away or tell his beer.

‘If you convict in this case all of the rooming houses in town will have to be on guard,’ said counsel for the defense, Al Wetmore. ‘I venture to say that a similar set of circumstances to these can be found in any large Timmins rooming house on a Saturday night.’

The set-up found by police, said the Magistrate, was similar to that found in plenty out of a hundred bling pigging cases which came before him. People were drinking in the early hours of the morning. They were wearing their hats and coats and the proprietor did not know them. Referring to Chaputski’s evidence, he said ‘His is one of the fanciest stories I have heard in a long time. Going to a man’s room at 2:30 a.m. to get ‘dry goods.’ It very likely was ‘wet goods’ he wanted and got.’