The Wilmington daily Republican., 1891-06-16
FIFTH EDITION.
CAPTAIN MITCHELL FINED.

& He Is Declared Guilty of Assauiting j.
II. O. Gorrell on Election Day In
!, sixth District. Fifth Ward = Others
Held for the Higher Court.
1t being generally known that Cap
stain Edmund Mitchell, Jr., was to be
, tried last night for committing an as
tIsault and battery on J; 4; O. Gorrell.
lat the Sixth district, Fifth ward, on
] election day, the Municipal Court
ilroom was rendered swelterlng hot by
the big crowd that rushed in.
; After several ordinary "drunksn had
been disposed OF Captain Mitchell's
lease was called.
He was represented by Walter II.
Hayes, Esq, and George A. Elliott,
Esq. City Solicitor Lyman appeared
for the State and requested all Witness
les on both sides to leave the room.
Judge Ball then asked all witnesses
ito leave, but counsel for the defense
Opposed the motion and refused 10
lgive the names of the witnesses.
Judge Ball said that any who re-
lmnined would not be heard.
MIR. Hayes wanted to know why such
Ian order was made.
Judge Ball said the same thing had
always been done at the request OF
either side. Mr.. Hayes then withdrew
ms objection.
Mr.. Gorrell then testified that he
went to vote June 0, got Into line sew
leral times but was as often pushed out
Between and O'Clock there was a
lull and he went to the window to vote,
land In reaching his hand over Captain
lMitchell's shoulder with his ballot,
Mitchell caught him by the lapel OF
ibis coatand pushed him away, saying
as no did so: "You can't vote now, you
must wait your turn" There was no
tline at the time and he saw no one at
tempting tovote. He and Joseph Och.
eltree were both pushed from the line.
Ho suffered no serious results from
Ithe push. There was q crowd around
the window at the time.
The court would not permit Mr..
Hayes to prove that Mr.. Gorrell was
mot aqualliied voter. Judge Ball agreed
with Mr.. Hayes that any citizen had
fright to be challenger, but IL must be
done In Il legal way. On cross-exami-
nation, Mr.. Gorrell said there were
from 40 to so persons on the porch.
Joseph i. Carpenter, Jr,, the Demo-
cratic challenger; Frank j. Carpenter.
sILee and Plumbing Inspector Edward
IF. Kane testified that Mitchell pushed
Gorrell away from the polls when he
/, went to vote.
J. Charles H. Groves, first witness for
,,Ithe defense, saw Gorrell go up TO vote,
i when Mitchell simply waived him
away with his hand, did not push him.
hIIhero was line OF men extending to
v the steps waiting to vote. He stood
e within 8 or feet OF Gorreli.
O i. B. Cotton followed Gorrcll to the
eIwindow because he had seen him in
-lcOnSultation with various Democrats
during the afternoon. and he wanted
!, to see what Gorrell proposed to do.
Mitchell simply turned and pushed
him from the window At the same
is time Mitchell said: This Is not your
y time to vote. Stand back and take
rIyour turn There was line leading
'-Iup to the window at the time md Cor
rel did not attempt to get In the line
!, iat that time.
n After argument OF the case byall the
: attorneys Mr.. Hayes. suddenly discov-
L erred that tho information illuu'' In the
T. ease had not been signed by either
: the city solicitor or the attorney gem
d!eral.
! Judge Ball decided the point we'll
taken and dismissed the case.
Mr.. Lyman at once signed the 'in-
formation and asked that tho case be
heard over.
Rathor than to go over the case
aSain Messrs Hayes and iottagreed
to allow the case to stand.
Judge Ball then rendered his decision.
In part he said:
''1'ha testimony OF Mr.. Gorrell Is that
Ihe went TO the polls in the sixth dis
1 ltrict OF the Firth ward TO vote. He got
+ lin line, but was forced out. He then
4 hayoided the line and going up to the
= window offered his vote. This is NOT
denied by any witness except ina neg
ative manner, one witness saying that
he not sec him.
There has been considerable contra
dictory testimony in regard to the line
lat the polls MIR. Cotton says there
were three or four mon In line. The
remainder Of the crowd were scattered
about the window Certain men whose
Votes had been refused by the inspec-
tors We're dt the window. Ii was then
that Mr. Gorfell attempted to vote.
He had the right. There was no line
of voters at that time. 1t Is not always
3 1.-THE custom to form lines. At no time
Us 1t proper to form u line to obstruct
lpolls.From the testimony this line was
Horned to obstruct Mr.. Gorell went
to the polls in legal and orderly
manner and offered TO vote. Captain
lAlitchell ln.erfered and prevented him.
In relatlonto Captain Mitclelps pres
lence there, tho act says that each party
has the right to have man at the
lpolls as a challenger. Captain Mitch,
: ell did not challenge Mcssrs. Carpen-
.dter and Martin were chailengers for
their respective parties Captain
Mitchell had no right interior ing on be
ldlctatng rs to who should vote and
Iwho should not.
"the laying on of hands, accompa-
lnled by such statements as acaompan-
led 1t in this case, constitutes assault
, land battery. lam compelled to find
Edmund Mitchell, Jr., guilty. There
was considerable crowd and consid-
-lernble disorder at that place on June
40. Captain Mitchell is reputable
Icltizen and n man to whom other
mon would look up. An action like
Ilhis on his part is much more seriou
than On the part OF another man. The
fine imposed Is S25 and costs"
, Captain Mitchell at once paid the
fine and costs, amounting to $3.50 in
.lall
Messrs, Hayes and Elliott then waly-
led hearings IN the cases cs i'ollce Ser
geanls A, Stetser ar, Paschnl II. Peter
ssSn and Oiiicera Alexander Burlelgh
and Amos q. Hahn for refusIng to
lobey the orders Of an inspector OF
ELECTION, and Edmund Mitchell, Dr.,
l1homas Brown, David jefferson, James
jlSipple and Henry Jackson for inter-
lfarinU wifi fhn nlantinn Mt tho anna