Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1891-10-08

and decision was reserved.
On Thursday Levi G. Bird, counsel
for the wife, made an application to the
court with reference to the case of DIR.
George H. Cantwell, who is applying
for divorce from his wife, AMMO G.
Cantwell. The court, some time since,
made an order directing tho petitioner
to pay $15 per week to the support of
his wife and their two children. Mr.. Bird
said that he had failed to comply regu-
larry with this order and now owed his
wife $3.50. He asked for an attachment
for DIR. Cantwell, as he understood the
doctor was about to leave the State. The
request for an attachment was granted.
The return of the commissioner in the
case, II. G. Conrad, is adverse to the
granting of the divorce.
Andrew Price, u colored man whose
bent form and white hair were somewhat
at variance with his rather youthful
and benevolent looking countenance,
was tried on charge of buying or re-
ceiving and concealing ten chickens that
had been stolen from Edward Farrell of
Blackbird hundred by Urias Mont
gomery. Attorney-general Biggs prose-
cuted the case. Urias, a middle-aged
colored man wearing battered coat,
mitted that he stole the chickens from
Mr.. Farrell, for which offence he paid a
penalty of five lashes and month in
Jail. He said that Andrew Price came
to his house after him twice, but he was
not at home, and so he went to Andrews
house to see what was wanted.
II went thar betw'n sundown and
daylight" said Urias. "Andrew, he
sed, 'How's chickens goin's' Rather
Slow sez |. L know whar thar's sum
that's easy to git sez he" Then Urias
said that Andrew urged him to steal the
chickens from Mr.. Farrell, promising to
sell them and divide the proceeds. "An'
stole the chickens an give 'em to him."
concluded Urias.
"Is your name Urias or Ananias," in
quired w. S. Hilles, who defended the
prisoner.
.'Its Urias, sah."
Mr.. Hilles requested Urias to look
Andrew Price in the face while he gave
.his testimony, but though Urias defiantly
z declared that he ''cud look ennybodyin
der face" he looked anywhere but in
the direction of the dock, whefe sat his
alleged companion in crime. Although
he made various contradictions as to de-
tails, he tenaciously stuck to the story
that the "chicken-raising" scheme was
the result of combination between
him and Price.
Constable Duhadaway said that Price
admitted him the purchase of the
chickens from Urias, in exchange for
some "meat and grub" and also said
that he knew the chickens were stolen.
"Did he say Il kneac they were stolen
or Il knoao they were stolen'?" inquired
Mr.. Hilles.
The difference in tense might have
had perceptible weight in determining
the prisoners guilt, as ignorance of the
theft at the time of the purchase would
tend to exculpate him, even if he had
leayed of it later. After deliberation
Mr.. Duhadaway declared that to the
best Of his knowledge and recollection
Andrews remark was 81 kaelo they were
stolen"
Mr.. Hilles told the jury that Urias
was self-confessed liar and self.con-
fessed chicken thief, and he could prove
that he was also lying in his testimony.
He then called Eliza Henson, a comely
mulatto woman, wearing a black straw
hat adorned with rather striking array
of dingy, white and pale blue feathers,
who was Andrew Prices housekeeper
at the time of the chicken episode. She
said that Urias' visit to the house, at the
time of the alleged conspiracy to de-
plete Farmer Farrcll's hen roost was an
hour before sundown, and not "betwn
sundown an daylight" as Urias had
alleged. He returned next morning,
with the chickens, so Eliza declared,
and in answer to Andrews inquiries.
said the chickens were his own property.
Then he sold the fowls to Andrew Price.
Eliza said she told Andrew he had bet
Ger not have anything to do with the
chickens, as she knew Montgomery was
noted chicken thief, but Andrew told
her to mind her own business.
Esquire Bratton of Townsend said
that Price was first arrested for the
theft of the chickens, but showed that
he had obtained them from Urias Mont
gomery. Andrew asserted at the time
that Urias had assured him the chickens
were his. At the hearing OF urias
Andrew Price was witness against him.
The case was submitted without argu-
ment and the jury, after a charge by
Judge Cullen, retired for consultation.
In half an hour they returned verdict
of guilty.
Hattie Locke, colored, was arraigned
and pleaded not guilty to charge of
usbtuib VIII lnleub VI commit nluruer
upon James Garner, colorod. The trial
was at once commenced, with Victor Il.
Wooley for the State and w. f. Smalley
for the defence. This case grew out Of
O disturbance in house of ill-fame at
No. 817 Walnut street, on the night of
September 10Th, during which Annie
Locke fired pistol shot at Garner. The
police subsequently raided the house.
Il was passing through a room," said
Harner in giving his testimony, "when
hat lady Indicating the prisoner) shot
1t me and rum"
The defence claimed that no shot was
red by Hattie Locke and that the only
Irouble in the house that night was oc-
casioncd by James Garner and his
brother, who were very disordcrly.
Testimony to this effect was given by
Susan Rudolph, proprietress of the
house, and others.
The case of the State VS.. Hattie Locke,
colored, charged with assault with in
tent to commit murder upon James Gar
ner, colored, was ended at Thursday
afternoons session of court, when the
=. 6usky Hattie was adjudged not guilty
Aby twelve men good and true and al
lowed to depart from the solemnity of
A tho court room.
' The case came up at the morning