Bridgeton pioneer., 1891-05-21

man. II take from one to three crates
a day." He further said that Payne
paid for the carting.
Geo. Davis, of Millville, knew PAYNE
but had never been to his house.
He further declared he had never
bought anything like ardent spirits of
Payne.
"Shingle" Hinderhoffer, the young
man who is usually found about
Payne's house, furnished all the beer
that the next witness, Geo Green, had
drunk there. He merely contributed
his mite in the mysterious box, when
he drunk beer.
Upon cross.examination Green said
that Hinderhoffer was janitor of the
club, which was located at Payne's
house.
Louis Tucker was another contribu-
tor to the bog and member of the
Club" He did not know anything
about the organization of the club, it's
officers or membership. Mr.. Tucker
knew nothing about the business of
the club.
On cross-examination Tucker said
that this club was made up of politi.
clans and Payne's house was "a sort of
paradise" for them. All the beer that
came was marked "C. P" club.
Il get my beer at Payne's like all of
the rest did; em member of the
club" remarked Jacob Webb, In an
swer to Prosecutor Logue's questions
He had no voice in the management
Of the club. 'All do" said he lis to
chip in and drink beer" Payne was
Treasurer of the club, and as far as he
knew, the only officer of the club. II
cannot tell how I pay for the beer, for
l don't know exactly how the club
works, and I don't know anybody
that does"
When the state rested, Mr.. Van.
Syckel arose and addressed the Court
and said, Il have motion or two to
make which think will end this case
right here" The Assemblyman claim
ed the state had failed to make it's
case because there had been no cyl
dence produced showing that Payne
sold liquor without a license. Again
he claimed that the state had failed to
prove that Payne had violated repeat
edly the Millville city ordinances, in
asmuch as the ordinances had not
been proved at all. The lawyer cited
rulings of the Supreme Court support.
ing his motion.
Both motions were over-ruled, the
Court holding that it was a matter of
defense to show whether or not there
was license granted the defendant.
Exceptions were taken, and Mr.. Nit
chell astounded the entire audience by
remarkipg I'VE shall offer no evidence
being satisfied to rest our case, upon
this point"
Hon. T. W. Trenchard and J. 8.
Mitchell, ESQ.,, made summing up for
the defense and the Prosecutor made
the closing argument, and the jury
was given the case by the Court.
Judge Hoagland sent for the Levor.
oni jury which had been out all night.
Foreman Matthews said there was no
probability of agreeing and the Court
discharged them. The jury stood
seven for acquittal and FIVE for con-
viction.
FRIDAY AFTERNOON.
John Demby, colored man,
charged with petty larceny, took a
position near his counsel, Hon. T. w.
Trenchard and this case began.
1t was shown that there was quite a
lengthy chain which fastened the guilt
upon the defendant, according to the
State. Here is the story.
Daniel Harman and a party of
friends were in Hopewell township on
Sunday, the Goth of July, and stopped
at the house of Thomas Demby. While
there Hartman fell asleep and when
he awoke he missed his watch and
guard. 1t was then shown that Har-
man received his watch back last
April from William Roberts. This
gentleman purchased the time piece
from William Garrison and he from
Clement Biggs. This latter gentleman
testified that he got the watch in part
payment for horse from the defend
ant.
When the defendant, Demby, was
permitted to go on the stand in his
OVID defense, he established different
sort of story. He remembers that
this party came to his house as they
relate, and he also says that Harmon
went to sleep, but during this nap
Demby went to church and remained