Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1866-03-23
THE EVIDENCE

THE EVIDENCE
llzs. JANE MoHnIs,r testified tha, she was
preparing to leave ,he Poor House, amer having
had nights shelter, when she missed child s
cape, which she was confident was on her child
when che came there, the night before. She
did not want to go without it, and said 50. Mrs
Miller, after some little search, told her the
cape never came there, grew abusive. ordered
her out Of the house, and seized her bundle to
throw il out Of doors. Witness sndsavored to
protect her property, when Mrs Miller seized
her by the hair, tore of her hood and scratched
her face; that then, in self defence, she struck
Mrs Miller with q small stick which she caught
up; thst Mr. Miller came, caught her by the
throat and choksd her severely, put her out
doors and kicked her down the steps, severely
bruising her with a kick in the side, and other
wise inJuTing her.
MRs. MARY MIrrgS. an inmate Of the Poor
house, testified that Mrs Morrissy declared she
would not leave till her child's cape W.s given
to her, that Mrs Miller seized her bundle to put
il out Of doors, when Mrs Morris.y struck Mrs
Miller with stick, that witness undertook to
part the women; that Mr. Miller thsn came snd
ehoked Of Mrs Morrisy and put her out Of
doors. What took place outside. witness did
not see Mrs Morrissy was very violent and
used prcfane language.
MRs Thankful WAsHBURS, an old lady Of
81. deaf feeble snd childish, said evidently
whatever she thought would best please Mrs.
Niller. According to her testimony, Mrs Nor
rissy assaulted Mrs Miller, without the slightest
proyocation.
RoBERr BRowSLEE, D. C. L., prefaced his
testimony. which was given with great dignity,
by the remark that he little thought on remoy-
ing from the city Of Burlington recently, that
so many respectable gentlemen would so soon be
so much reduced as to follow him to the Poor
house. He testified to seeing Mrs Miller and
Mrs Morrissy in a sharp scufie, decidedly in
close columns" as he expressed 1t; both much
excited. He saw Mrs MorrissY lih her hand
with the stick in il. as if 10 strike Mrs Miller;
but did not see her strike her. Mr. Miller ehok-
cd the woman off with what precise amount Of
violence. witness would not undertake to state;
but be thought "she felt it." He did not see
the transaction outside the door.
Mr.. TAFT, for the defence, argued that Mrs.
Morrissy had no business at the Poor house,
having come there without q proper permit from
the poormaster; that Mrs Miller WAS justified in
putting her and her property out, by force il
necessary; that Mrs Morrissy first assaulted Mrs
Miller, and that Mr.. Miller did no more than
he ought to do, in protecting his wife and eject
ing the IriShwoman.
Mr. EsGLEsDI, for the State, maintained
that the woman having once been properly sd-
mittei by order Of the Poormaster, then leaving
temporarily 10 find work, returning in good
faith, and having been admitted by Mrs. Miller
was lawfully an inmate Of the POorhou.e that
on leaving she was entitled to all her property I;
that she had right to prevent her bundle from
being thrown out into the mud /; that the weight
Of testimony showed that she did not begin the
use Of violence /; and that nothing save immi-
nent danger to life or property, could justify
Mr.. Miller in such violence upon a woman, as
hs used in the severe choking, and the kicking
down the steps, as to which the complainnant's
testimony was uncontradicted.
The Justice with a brief statement that Mrs.
Morrissy ought to have left at once when order
ed, and thst the Millers were justified in using
force to put her out, il she refused to go,
ordered the discharge Of the respondent. The
kicking Of the woman down the steps, AFTER she
had been put out, wss apparently considered
not Of consequence enough to be alluded to.
We have only to add, that We trust this
decision Is not to be taken as jastifying any
amount Of personal abuse, if an inmate Of
the Poorhouse be slow in obeying orders.
We take it that those in charge, are placed
there to exercise kind and tOrbedring treat
ment towards the unlortunates under their
care. Mrs. Miller's long use OF arbitrary
control and naturally quick temper disqual-
ify her, in a measure, We suspect. for her
position. If the case shows the keepers Of
the poorhouse. that public accounting may
sometimes follow harsh treatment of the
paupcrs. it will have done good.