The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1889-12-02
RUSCH'S EXPLANATION"
He Tells Why He Reopened
the Case of Timekeeper
Peters.
BECAUSE HE WANTED 70, APPARENTLY.
Witness Scheckenstein's Remarka-
Shift---John Dunt's Story.

August Peters, the timekeeper on the
Hamburg dock, who was charged with
an attempt at criminal assault by Mrs.
Begeman, pretty young married woman,
was ''acquitted' by Justice Rusch on
Saturday, and thereby hangs tale.
To the casual observer it looked rather
queer that Justice Rusch on Saturday
morning should reopen the case after he
had already held Peters for the Grand
Jury. His Honor was told that he had
exceeded his authority by Counsellor
Bretfred, counsel for Mrs. Begeman.
saw Justice Rusch this morning. He
said that when he made his decision on
Tuesday morning he told Peters that if
he could prove Mrs. Begeman black
mailer he would hold the papers in the
case.
But Justice" 7 said, ''you accepted
bail for Peter appearance before the
Grand Jury in the sum of $500, and then
you disposed of the case on Saturday
morning.
''WelI, 1 know that" he said, 'sbut
was satisfied from the statement Of
Scheckenstein that this woman was
blackmailer"
Are you allowed to take testimony for
the defense?' / asked.
NO; the witnesses for the defense were
not sworn. They only made statement.
Scheckenstein's statement / thought
sufficient to warrant me in acquitting
Peters, as Mrs. Begeman admitted all
that he had stated. / have sent all the
papers in the case to the Grand Jury.
SCHECKENSTEIN'S SHIFT.
Now comes the queer part of the story.
Arthur Scheckenstein was the main wit
ness for the State at the examination on
Monday night. He was the amateur
detective who listened at the keyhole and
the house. 1t was his testimony that
bore hardest against Peters at that time.
While he was under oatn he was asked
by Counsellor Stuhr, of the defence, if he
knew of anything detrimental to the
character of Mrs. Begeman. He said
he did not, and yet on Saturday morning
he was produced as witness for the de-
fense. In his statement then he said
that he was asked by Begemen some time
ago to accompany him and watch him
catch a well known contractor of Jersey
City in a compromising position with his
(Begeman's) wife. He said that suit at
that time was brought against the man
for $4,000, but was compromised on the
payment of S100 This statement of
Scheckenstein's is hard to reconcile with
his testimony on the previous examina-
tion, when he said, under oath, that he
did not know anything detrimental to
the character of Mrs. Begeman.
THEY TALK ABOUT PETERS.
Although this particular charge against
Peters has not been sustained there are
several men at present employed at
night work on the Hamburg dock who
would like to say something about
Peters, but are afraid of losing their
situations.
1 talked to about dozens of them and
they said that Peters was always lucky
in getting out of scrapes
John Dunt, of No. Sc Willow avenue, is
laborer employed at night work on the
Hamburg dock. He told me that about
six months ago, while he was at work,
Peters visited his house and attempted to
take liberties with his wife.
"The next night he said, 81 laid for
him and drove him from the house with
a poker. Since that time he has not
bothered me-"
Mr.. Dunt also told me the name of an
other young married woman, who had
been visited by Peters during husbands
absence. When | saw her she denied it.
Peters is brother-in-law of Captain
Badenhausen, the superintendent of the
dock, and has great deal to say about
the putting on of men. Dunt fears that
he will lose his job for making this state
ment to me. The majority of the night
men do not speak well of Peters-to put
it mildly.