The Lambertville record. [volume] (Lambertville, N.J.) 1872-1968, 1880-05-05
Especially Reported for THE REcoRp.1
COURT PROCEEDINGS.
bennington. N. J.. MAY q

$40 Pennington, N. j., May 4, 1880.
In the case of the State VS.. Edward e. Beat
ty and William II. Beatty, the verdict of the
Jury, who were still out at the time of our
last report, was guilty.
Gu Wednesday the Decatur and Vert mat
ter was proceeded with. The State charged
that the assault was premeditated and the
intention of the defendant was to seriously
iDjure Decatur. The prosecutors version Of
the affair was briefly as follows A quarrel
had arisen between himself and Vert in re-
gard to a robbery which had been committed
at Wert's house. Vert had publicly declared
that Decatur had stolen his money, or receiv-
ed it from Rosa Ellis, whom he had induced
to steal it from him. Decatur denied the
charge and requested the defendant to allow
him the privilege of fighting him. This Vert
declined to do On the night Of the affray
Decatur and Rosa went up to Wert's place.
On arriving there no oRewas seen about the
house, and Decatur then went on to a neigh
bors to find Vert. Not finding him be return
ed and when opposite Wert's gate defendant
suddenly appeared and fired at Decatur, the
charge whstling by his ear. Decatur rushed
towards him, and inst as he was about firing
a second time struck his gun down, the charge
being received in his foot. Decatur then
knocked him down and left. The defendant
insisted that he had repeatedly warned the
prosecutor to keep away from his place. That
on the evening in question, he was feeding
his hogs when he saw Decatur and Rosa COM
ing to his place. He hid himself and saw them
go upon. the porch and try the door and heard
the prosecutor say that he (Wert) must have
some more money in the house and now was
good time to get it. He then slipped into
the house and got his gun and then ordered
Decatur to go away and In order to Brighten
him, fired one barrel into the air. Decatur
then sprang forward at the same time firing
club at him. Then he threw some stones, one
of which struck defendant in the eye and
knocked him down. He rose to his knees and
as Decatur was running up to him he shot
him with the remaining load. Decatur then
knocked him down and cut him with knife.
He charged that he was ia fear of his life
when the second shot WAS fired. Verdict,
not guilty. a,S *.
The State vs. George Schuyler. This was
an indictment for malicious mischief for
shooting dog belonging to David WEIGH, at
Califon. The defense was that the shot was
fired at a rabbit and il the dog was hit 1t was
entirely accidental and without the knowledge
of the defendant. The State produced wit
nesses who testified to threats Of the defend
ant to shoot the dog. Verdict, not guilty.
State VS.. Ernest Cook. The defendant,
who is barber, residing at Hampton juno
ton, vas indicted for assaaiting one Keller,
saloon keeper at the same place. Keller had
building burned a short time previous and
had accused the defendant of being the In
cendiary. Defendant went to his saloon to
get retraction and carried gun with him,
for defence, If necessary. The State produc-
ed evidence of threats of shooting and an aim
| ing of the gun. The defense denied any
such threats or actions. Verdict, guilty.
| State VS.. Emily Dryer. This was for an
assault with stones. The case grew out of a
disputed line and one of the main questions
was the title to some property held by the
defendant. Verdict, not guilty.
State VS.. Joseph Wyckoff and Charles
/ Crany. This Indictment was for larceny Of a