Bridgeton pioneer., 1890-05-15

and recognized them. They had four
chickens-a rooster and three hens. 1t
was On the night of April 18th, on 60
ing home he found his hen roost had
been broken open and his chickens
We're gone. A search warrant subse-
quently found the chickens in the po-
session of the defendants; they were
found in the cellar; he identified them
as his chickens.
While this case was on, the jury that
had been celebrating on the English
case ceme in and verdict of guilty
rendered.
TUESDAY AFTERNOON.
There was plenty of interest in the
afternoon session of Court yesterday,
case of assault and battery being on,
in which some good people from Car
mel were principals.
In the Pullen case, the defence was
conducted by Mr. Trenchard. Mrs. Pull
lena great talker, was upon the stand.
She was perfectly innocent she said,
and while she had at times visited Mr..
Mr.. Vanhorn, she had never been
In bis hen roost. Mrs. Pullen said
that the chickens found in her cellar
were there because she had mo earthly
place in the yard to keep them. Mrs
Pullen said that she could not identify
the Italian woman of whom the chick
ems were purchased. 'And wouldn't
attempt to bring any innocent person
in this scrape. have suffered thus
far, and l will go on to the end"
During the cross-axamination, Mrs.
Pullen admitted writing letter TO
Justice Hall, who had committed her,
and the Prosecutor read it. In this
letter, Mrs. Pullen stated that she
would give $25 to the Justice if he
| would let up on her. Mrs. Pullen
stated in explanation that she did this
because the family was being tlisgraced
by the suit.
Miss Lottie Pullen a daughter, and
one of the defendants, gave testimony
very similar to that of her mother.
Albert Wilnan, a. boarder in the
house of the Pullen's, stifed that on
the night of the alleged chicken thiev-
ing, the mother and daughter were
out less than half an hour.
The summing up of the lawyers fol-
lowed this testimony, and the Jury
went out for deliberation.
The Jury in the PulIen case returned
a verdict of guilty, and recommended
the defendants to the mercy of the
Court.
Thos. Berry was called upon to plead
to two counts of chicken stealing and
entered plea of not guilty.
MIR. Van 5yckel who represents John
Bogar and Bryant johnson, who have
been indicted for fornication, pre-
sented to the Court an affidavit which
set forth that Frank Ross, very i'm
portant witness to the defense was out
of the jurisdiction of the Court, and
an application was made to have the
trial put off. Judge Hoagland re-
marked that the affidavit was not
wholly satisfactory, and said he did
not like to put off trialfor this cause.
Mr.. Van Syckel made an eloquent
plea for his cause, declaring that he
felt that he could not try the case
without this man.
The first case to attract the atten-
tion of the court, was the case o: the
State against Sarah Kenin, assault
and battery. Mrs. Fanny Weits,nan,
a charming little brunette, whose
home, she said, was in Carmel, was
upon the stand as the first witRess,
and declared that she was the victim
of the assault.
Mrs. Weitsman did not have a good
English delivery, and it was with some
difficulty that her story was under
stood. Her tale of woe was to the eff
feet that four weeks from yesterday
Mrs. Kenin knocked her down in the
house of a neighbor, and put her feet
on my stomach"
Hon. Thos. W. Trenchard appeared
as counsel for the defendant, and he
rigidly cross examined the witness. He
developed from her that a quarrel had
been brewing for sometime between
Mrs. Kenin and herself.
David Weitsman, the husband of ta 9
lady who was upon the stand, told of
his returning home upon the day of
assault, and found his wife suffering
from bruises, scratches, ETC., looking
as if she had been beaten. He said
that two hours before the fracus, Mrs.
Kenin told him she was going to whip
his wife
Marcus Stein, resident of the little
Jewish settlement, was an eye witness
of the assault. He was at home about
a hundred feet from the place where
the fracas occurred. He saw two