The Democratic press. [volume] (Ravenna, O. [Ohio]) 1868-1901, 1889-08-15
OHIO VS., DUsTMAN.

W. F. JEWELL. Secretary.
OHIO VS., DUSTMAN.
Defendauts Acquitted.
- Sheffleton and VIM. Dustman
have owned and lived on adjoining
farms in Deerfield township for the
past twenty-five years, during fourteen
of which the families of the respective
proprietors have not enjoyed that
neighborly intercourse recommended
by those congeniai qualities character
izing the social relation, and have
therefore closed their gates against the
prefane entrance of each other. AS j.
us nal in such state of affairs, mutual
distrust and jealously played an active
part in moulding their estimates of
each other, which gradually ripened
into an intense aversion to the ba,e
presence or sight of their neighbors
over the line. 1t was very seldom that
either family endeavored or had any
desire to disregard the mandate of ex
clusion directed against them, and
these occasions were ones of policy or
business necessity. But on the 10Th
day of last June at o'clock p. M
Mrs. Deborah She ffleton, the prosecu
ting witness, imagined that her pres
ence at the Dustman manor was
matter of supreme necessity. for she
had lost her turkeys and at once locat
ed them Tin her mind) ut the premises
of the defendants Thither she pro-
ceeded, and without wasting much
formality, inquired if her feathered
charges were there. Minnie Dustman,
daughter of the other defendant, re.
piled that she thought not, but would
go out to the orchard with Mrs. 8 and
see They accordingly did SO and
found seven turkeys, but Mrs. 8. said
they were not hers and thereupon re,
turned to her home. About o'clock
of the same day, another knock was
heard at the Dustman residence which
was responded to by Mrs. Dustman,
who. in answer TO the inquiry of Mrs
s. concerning the whereabouts, of her
turkeys, said she knew nothing about
them. She asked Mrs. S. how many
turkeys she had and Mrs. s. replied
Heleven," and at the same time claim
ed that her turkeys were there, saying
'you stole my turkeys last year and
: you have stolen them this year." to
which Mrs. d. promptly retorted, we
neither steal turkeys or sheep"
AT this point it is claimed that Mrs.
8. called Mrs. D. q liar, which SO in.
censed Mrs. ID. that she ordered her
out of the house. saying IF you have
come for a quarrel, you must get out of
this" Then it wss that the wounds
of the tongue gave way to those in
f1icted by more substantial weapons,
each party, at the trial, claiming that
the other struck the first blow; but be
that as it may, Mr.. and Mrs. D., &C.
cording to the evidence, actively inn
pelled Mrs. 8. through the doorway
out on to the porch, Mrs. b. claiming
that her egress therefrom was hastened
by kick from the irate Mrs. ID whose
husband testified that he guessed his
wife meant TO thus assist the plaintiff,
but only hit her hustle.
her from the porch to flower bed in
the yard, where Mrs. s. picked up a
heavy picket lying on the ground and
struck Mrs. ID. furious blow on the
of
claiming her act to be in self defense.
AT this juncture, Minnie Dustman
emerged from the house and securing q
picket similar to Mrs. DIS came up to
her and said, ' IN learn you to strike
my mother. and thsreupon commenc
Ell treating her to some vigorous blows,
in which she was assisted by hel
mother. the trio retreating to within
10 feet of the gate, reBding the all
with the sound of the blows rained on
each others bodies, and exhaustins
their force of adjectives in defining
their mutual opinions and aversions
Mrs. Sheffieton concentrating all hel
energies into one final effort, by which
she threw her club with sufficient &C
curacy to cause it to strike Mrs. d. or
the back, she claiming that Mrs. d
was standing at the gate ia a menac
ing attitude, and Mrs. ID. , that she haG
abandoned the conflict and was re
treating toward the house.
Mrs. s. thereupon caused the arres
of MIR. and Mrs. Dustman and daugh
ter Minnie, who were given hearing
before a J. P. resulting in the discharg,
of Mr.. ID. and the binding over of tn,
other defendants for trial in the Pro
bate Court, which commenced las
Thursday, and continued without in
terruption until Saturday afternoon
when the jury after short deIibera
tion, aquitted the defendants. one o
whom had already suffered sever,
physical penalties for exercising he
prowess in the noble art.
Between 40 and so witnesses wer
summoned, and the defendants car
have the satisfaction, if any they find
of knowing that the county will hav'
to pay between $3.50 and 500 for tn,
privilege of adjudging them guiltless
They are probably the only ones in tn,
county who will derive any pleasur,
from the forced contribution, for the
average citizen of this county has ana
pie taxes to meet now.
The State was represented by Prose
cutor Maxson, assisted by Alexande
Moore, Esq., of Garfield, while th'
defendants interests were cared for by
J. II. Nichols, Esq and Messrs. Sid
dali and Douthitt.