The New Bloomfield, Pa. times. (New Bloomfield, Pa.) 1877-188?, 1881-08-09

hci, ~ tNlutnbll DtlUR HIS DblIti hNhb bne way
to get rid of q woman Is to marry her, which,
however, is n great mistake for any man to
make, ms the defendant found TO his cost. The
Court directed him to pay the costs, and $50
a year for the support Of his wife and chlld.-
feibert Il Wallis for Com. VIM. A. sponsler,
for defendant.
Com VS.. Mary Rice, of Mdrysvllle. Mary
Longnecker, prosecutrlx. This was a difficult
ty between neghbors, such as sometimes hap
pens when women talk too much which, of
course, is very seldom Indeed. The defendant
maintained herself In Court, and denied the
charge of threats and all charges generally,
and, indeed talked long aud well aud became
30 graphic In description OF the "scenes" be-
tween herself and the prosecutrx, that IL really
seemed as If tho modest prosecutrlx, who had
given her testimony in quiet way, must have
made a mistake In the person, and would per-
haps be talked out of Court. To q reflective
mind II often no doubt occurs to wonder why
so nuch motive power.is slowed away in wom-
ans tongue and is not oftener turned TO some
benefcent or even useful end. IL Is often strong
enough to move the wheel of Wind MILL
The Court, after hearing the evidence, direct
ed each party to pay their own costs Wallis
for Com. Barnett for def't.
Nor TRUE BILLS.
Com. VS.. Mary Rice. Charge - Common
Scold Mary Longnecker, Prosecutrx.
Com. VS.. Andrew Holleubaugh. Charge
Malicious mischief Prosecutor, VIM. Kane,
to pay costs of prosecution.
TRUE BILLS.
Com. VS.. William Redman. Oharge-Mal-
cious mischief. j. A. Rice, prosecutor.
Com. vs. John Rice. Charge -Fornication
and Bastardy. Caroline z. Jacobs, prosecutor.
Com. vs. JOS 9. Leonard Charge = Lar
ceny and receiving stolen goods. Ulrich Rum
baugh, prosecutor.
Com. vs. Samuel Kepner and James NJ. Ra-
gar. Charge-Larceny and receiving stolen
goods. John Hartzell, prosecutor.
Com. VS.. VIM. Reeder Charge-Assault.-
VIM. Kane, prosecutor.
NoLLE PRosEQUIEs.
Com. VS.. Jos. Hile. Charge - Assault and
Battery, on oath OF Margaret A. Hile, of To-
boyne township.
Com. VS.. John IT, Hile and Margaret A.
Hile. Charge-Assaut, with intent to kill on
oath of Joseph Hle, of Toboyne township.
Com. VS.. Jacob Bixler. Charge - Assault
and Battery, on oath of John A. Albright, of
New Buffalo.
Com. VS.. Gustave Boles. Charge Assault
aud Battery, on oath Of William Hall, of
Spring township.
Com. VS.. Gustave Boles. Charge-Assaut
and Battery, on oath of William Il. Hall, of
Spring township.
Com. VS.. Adam Wolf. Charge-Assaultan and
Battery ard pointing flre-arm at another, on
oath of John S. Btner, of Landisburg.
Com. vs.. Samuel Rumbaugh. Charge-For-
nication and Bastardy, on oath of Margaret
Elliott, of Duncannon.
Com. VS.. Daniel Keck Charge-Fornica-
tion and Bastardy, (No. 3, Jan. T. 1Ss1,) on
oath of Mary E. Smeigh, of Landisburg
Com. VS.. Robert A. Morrow. Charge-As-
saut ard Battery, on oath of s. NJ. Lightner,
of Landisburg.
Com. VS.. S. M. Lightner Charge-Assault
and Battery, on oath of Robt. A. Morrow, of
Tyrone township.
Com. VS.. Benz Dillmnn and j. W. Johnston.
Charge-Larceny and receiving stolen goods
on oath of Andrew 10y, of Loysyille.
Com. VS.. David Morrison, jr., William Nor
rison, Woodburn Mitchell and Hanson Weav-
or. Charge-Burglary, Conspiracy, Riot and
Assault and Battery on oath of David A. Eb-
erts, of Tyrone township.
Com. VS.. Same. Charge of Riot, Consplra-
cy, and Assault and Battery, on oath of Lizzie
j. Eberts, of Tyrone township.
Com. VS.. Emanuel Morrison. Charge
Threats, on oath of David A. Bbeits, OF Ty-
rome township.
Com. vs. Jos. c. Leonard. Charge-Larceny
aud receiving stolen goods, on oath of Ulrich
Rumbaugh, of Greenwood township.
Com. VS.. William Reeder. Charge-As-
sault, on oath of William Kane, of Spring tp.
THE CRIMINAL TRIAL LIST.
Com. vs. Wm. Redman. Charged with
throwing stones through the U. s. Mail Coach,
at Newport, on July 4th, 1881. j. A. Rice,
prosecutor. The defendant, in explanation,
and by way of defense testified that he suppos-
ed ho threw the stones but that he was drunk
at the time and didn't know what he was CO.
ing. This defense, however, in law, is bad, for
If it were allowed, then all that a man need do
when he wanted to commit an outrage would
be to get drunk first and then do the deed and
he never could be punished. Such is not the
law. The jury seemed to think that there
Il.
in favor of the young man,-whether drunken
ness or something else-for they delivered a
verdict of not guilty. Directing, however,
that the defendant pay the costs of prosecution.
The young man, not having any money, went
to jail. Wallis for Com. Wm. A. Sponsler
for def't
Com. VS.. John Rice, alias Smolniker Rice,
charged with fornication and bastardy on oath
of Caroline p. Jacobs of Junlata township
twp. In this case the defendant appeared at
the bar for trial without lawyer, and the case
proceeded very quietly to conclusion Of
guilty WITHOUT any vigorous effects by the de-
fendant to avoid that certainly undesirable
result. He seemed simply to have cast himself
into the stream of trial to float or sink or
bring up at such harbor as the current might
decide. The testimony was pretty strong
against him. The time and place were proven.
The defendants admissions were proved -
And the baby does most wonderfully resemble
him. The defense consisted of simple gem
neral denial Of guilty, and an expression OF
sorrow for the girl in her unfortunate situation.
He felt bad, no doubt, and, perhaps, If he had
1t to do over again he wouldn't do SO but sor-
row over the past, in this case didn't seem to
atone for that past, and John had the painful
experience passed upon him of listening to the
verdict of the jury finding him guilty in man
ner and form as he stood indicted. The usual
sentence followed, land in default Of compliance
Herewith he was committed to jail. Wallis
for Com. Defendant for himself
Com. We. Jas. NJ. Ragar aud Saml. Kepner,
charged with Larceny and receiving OF stolen