New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-10-16
LOCAL MISCELLANY.
THE KELSEY OUTRAGE.

TRIAL OF ROYAL eAMMIs AND DIR. GEORGE p. BANKS
FOR ASSAULT AND BATTERY-ACQUITTAL OF HE
ACCUSED.
After n lapse of nearly three years since the
outrage in Huntington, L. l., and the DISAPPEARANCE OF
Charles G. Kelsey, Royal samnIis and Dr. George b
Banks have been arragned before Judge j. F. Barnard
in the Suffolk County Court OF oyer ana Ierihhtr III
Riverhead l. t. and tried on charge OF assault anu pV
terry II was understood that this was to be test case
an DDS an acaniita has been secured Rudolph and Royal
sammis will probably not tcd n is thought, upon the
indictments against them of murder in the second degree
j. H. Tuthin District Attorney OF Suffolk County was
aided in prosecuting the suit by exAtorney 1ehera
C. Barlow. The defense conducted by eS-Asss'ah'
District Attorney John r. Fellows and Charles W.
Brooke In opening, District Attorney Tuth entered
tno the particulars OF the assault upon Charles o. ke
Soy on Nov g. 1872 He described how Kelsey was
tarred and featherod the mutilation and MS disappear
ance since which nothing had been heard OF him.
william j. Wood Of Huntington testified that he had
been asked by Mr. Banks Nov f. 1872 to be present
.hen Kelsey was punished he had declined the lhVita
ton but afterward had seen Kelsey surrounded by
crowd among whom he had recognized Dr Banks VII
liam s. Kelsey, brother Of Charles e. Kelsey tesueu
that he had heard Royal Sammis utter threats against
his brother. lie also related the particulars OF mis-
brothers return home on the night OF the og'Tase ana
seen nor heard from This testimony was substantially
corroborated by Henry +. Kelsey. 80,
John McBay, Arthur 7. Hurd, Caudus + Prime, Apoy
q smith, and Frederick Titus testified 10 the same dcls
which were brought out at the previous trial
Col Fellows moved that The Court instruct the jury 10
return verdict OF acquittal the ground that no ey
dcncc had been produced by the prosecution To sustain
The charges riot assault and battery Judge Barnard
denied the motion and the counsel opened the case fo
the defense with the examination OF Justice Wlan H.
Montfort who was summoned TO impeach the testimony
OF Titus. :. RI. ,.,
defense and his testimony in some particulars contra
dcted that which he gave before Justice Monot al us
previous examination. He said that he saw the tafhs
and featherng going on but he had not the ieast ss
pcion that any such outrage lad been planned Inc
Witness stated also that he saw 10 masks In ms mousse
When he went Mrs Oaklcys back yard his intention
was TO talk with Kelsey and demonstrate WIN MN upon
Ris conduct -, 4. - A..
District ttOrney Tuthill examined 20 show that
be had advised watching Kelsey. He sild tat he hau
been informed that Kelsey love crazy anu th1l
he spent his time in proving around MISS Oakley mouse
i'm such to render himself liable 10 be sueu
fer trespass. Under these circumstances the DISTRICT
Attorney acknowledged that ne had s1d that ne thought
Kelsey ought 10 be watched Royal SammlS testified posi-
tyely that he had known nothing OF the tarllng ana
fcathering of Kelsey previous 10 its occurrence
Several witnesses examined upon MINOR points
connected with the case and then the defense rested
Both sides introduced rebuttng testimony and cOuIsc
anmmed up their Judge Barnard delivered ms
charge, aud the given 10 the jury: AFTER
deliboTating until $50 D. No. the jury brought III yer
diet not guilty The verdict was received with mingled
applause signs of dissatisfaction by the dense crowd
N he