Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1892-01-21


Watson. New witnesses were produced
other than those In the case heard last
week when there was disagreement of
the jury. Austin Harrington for the
defence endeavored TO show Goslin's
relative independence of aid from Har-
rington and that he deposited the
vouchers with Hezekiah Harrington Of
Harrington for safe keeping. The
government prosecutor produced an
affidavit made by Goslin in which the
latter stated that he had deposited the
pension papers as pledge. Postmaster
Shaw Of Harrington and Hezekiah
Harrington of the same place testified
that Goslin's reputation is bad. Wit
nesses for the defence testified other
wise.
District Attorney Beniah Watson in
addressing the jury claimed the ques-
ton was very simple one-whether
the pension papers had been given as a
pledge. The affidavit offered, which is
subscribed to by Goslin, states that the
pension papers had been given for
pledge. The prosecuting officer stated
that if he wished he could have Goslin
indicted for perjury in his testimony of
to-day.
Following lengthy reply from
Austin Harrington the court took re-
cess until o'clock.
At the opening of the afternoon SEES
sion of court District-attorney Benah
Watson addressed the jury in the Goslin
case.
In his charge to the jury Judge Wales
explained the nature of the law in re-
gard to pledging pension certificates
The duty Of the jury was to ascertain
whether Goslin pledged his pension GER
tiiicate or whether he only placed it
with Hezekiah Harrington for safe
keeping.
The case was given to the jury at 2.45
.. IN. 1t took them exactly 10 minutes
10 make up their mind on verdict of
guilty. A recommendation was added
for the clemency of the court. The
prisoner was fined $50 and costs. In
making this light sentence the court
bore in mind Goslin's extreme age and
the jury's recommendation.
The next case called was that of
Robert P. Carey, provision merchant of
this city, charged with infraction of the
oleomargarine law.
The following jury was called Will
lard s. Lacey, John p. Doughten,
George Wiley, Jabez Jenkins, ii. Clay
Matthews, Henry ]. Crippen, David
Choate, Peter g. Lowber, Elwood Gar
rett, Edward Rumford, James w. An
tnony and Joseph Mcdaniel.
The special point was that the de-
PENDANT failed as retail dealer to mark
or brand his packages, as required by
law. Three detectives called at Gareys
store, No. 81 King street, last May.
One of them, in the presence of the
others, bought quantity of butter, less
than 10 pounds. This butter was taken
to DIR. C. L. Penny, analyst Of Delaware
College, who found it to be oleomarg-
airline. Another chemist also verified it
TO be oleomargarine. Carey failed to
wrap it up with his name and address :
"ltobert P. Carey, dealer in oleomarg
arine, No. 81 King street" as required
by law.
Deputy Collector of Internal Revenue
Daniel Burton of this district testified
that Carey took out special stamp for
the sale of oleomargarine.
William X. Leatherman of Philadel-
phia, an employee of John r. Morris
detective agency testified visiting Garey's
store on May 9th and purchasing butter.
He bought II pounds for 80 cents. 1t
was in tub, not in an original package.
II was wrapped up in piece Of brown
paper by the saleslady and Leatherman
handed 1t to John II. Morris, another de-
tective Morris wrote the place, date
and hour on the wrapper. The same
day the package was taken by witness
to DR. G.. L. Penny, the analystat Della
ware College.
Levi G. Bird, who appeared for the
defence, then took the witness and
ascertained that Leatherman has been
looking for violations of the oleomar.
garine law. He has been doing it fol
ii months. Back of Morris, his EN-
ployer, is the Dairymen's National Asso.
citation, who employ Mr., Morris.
The witness, on Mr.. Birds request
looked around and recognized lady
.with glasses who favored the one" he
purchased the goods from. The wit
ness could tell oleomargarine from but
ter in a general way, but not scientiti
cally. He tasted it and paid 80 cents
for tho article.
John II. Morris, No. 92l EdgelJ
street, Philadelphia, was the next wit
ness. He is chief detective of thu
National Dairymen's Protective Asso
citation. He has acted also for tn,
Delaware Association. Although no
in the store, he saw from the stree
Leatherman make the purchase. TX
Mr.. Bird he stated he is located a
Marsh's bank building in Philadelphia
The creamery people are the ones VIII
employ him.
Mr.. Bird-"None Of my business
but suppose you get such pay as tn
average detective does 7"
Witness-"Yes, SIR"
The next witness was DIR. Charles
Penny, the chemist of the Delaware Elk
pertinent Station. He has been analys
three years He is graduate Of Buck
nell University, Pennsylvania. He ha
studied 10 months at Heidelberg and on
the story of the package of oleo1nal
garine received from the detectives.
DR.. Penny relied on two tests to prov
the oleomargarine. Under both h
proved to his own satisfaction that tn
article contained other than butter ia
and that it was not butter. A porto
of the sample was subjected to ID
Henry Letferman Of Philadelphia.
In reply to Mr. Bird the witness de
fined oleomargarine as the substitute fc
butter made from any other article tina
milk.
District attorney Watson then too
up his argument. He offered in test
mony the familiar gray-covered pan
phlet of rules and regulations (
the commissioner of revenue. 1t We
offered us law in the case and as III
basis, in part, upon which the govern
ment made up its case. The district-a
torney read extracts from it shown
how the defendant had violated Ii
regulations