Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1893-07-26
STATE vs.. p0aIeR.
ICcr6rue,s from third page !

neus from the witness thar Porter hal sro-
ken with him several times relative TO the
fxht. Clark had also referred 10 il once
IN lis preseace.
W r. Jennings had worked for CLARK
in the spring sas Iii not recall ever having
beard him make threats against Porter, al
though hs gathered from his remarks that
TIA re vas not was nor the best Of feeling be-
tween the two men.
Harry shas tes.ihsl that Psrter came to
the Shaw house about ) a'cloek In = {
morning Cox .oae Sagon grease and a
bucket OF sEiil ana started for home He
was GA the bank by the house where he
could see Porter as be walked down the
alley tosaf,l Gage street. Saw Clark come
up TO Porter and charge him with having
toi lies to Mrs ShaS about him Clark
struck at Porter with a wrench, but wit
ness could rot swear that he hit him. Por'
ter 81, down his pail and box of grease ard
ciached with Clark. throwing him upon the
grounl. Clark struggled and Porter had
hard work to hold him down. Saw
Porter strike Clark twice with his tis;.
CLARK called for witness to pull Porter of.
Witness pat his hand on Porter's shoulder
ami told him 10 get of. Porter replied tel
Silkey 10 cor,e and get him Clark. George
Hatch came eut and pulled Porter cut.
Didn't hear Porter say anything to Clark
When Porter bit him Clark cried "mar'
der"
Mrs. Rose Porter testified that her hus-
band came to her immedi lately sitter the
fight and told her all about it. He had q
large bunch on the back Of his head an,
two fresh scratches on his face which were
bleeding.
Mrs. Cookson, married daughter, testi-
fed that Clark had told her, several day:
before the fight, that he wasn't through
with Porter yet referring TO some former
trouble between them. This closed the
testimony.
In reviewing the case, Mr.. GODDARD
claimed that Clark had been from the tirsi
the aggressor, fact amply proven by The
various witnesses who had been examined
He had evidently come TO the CONCLUSION
that because Porter had not resented hi
abuse with violence, he was coward ant
would submit to almost any indignity. lie
claimed that in striking CLARK, Porter wa,
acting purely in self-defence
Mr.. Southland denied that Mr. Clark ha.
been the aggressor. Said that Porter
record was bad. He was quarrelsome. Ill
had slsnderous tongue and a dirty one
If men like him were permitted 10 engage
in such affairs as the assault upon Mr.
Clark and 90 unpunished what citizen OF
Augusta would be safe. Porter weighed Al
least 100 pounds in the sigor of life. Mr.
Clark was an Old man over Jp years of agt
! and weakened by sickness. He was in nc
sense match for Porter physically and i
was senseless to assume that he would in
vite trial of strength with him. 1t was mo-
in dispute that the pail in which Porter
carried the swill was Clark,
property. IL was natural un lei
the circumstances that he should have
spoken TO Porter about IT, IN taking THU
old man down and pounding him in tn,
vicious manner that his couhtenance still
bore proof Of, Porter had b7er guilty Of ar
assault of an aggravated chatacter.
Judge Andrews said that as the warrant
was for aggravated assault there was some
| question of jurisdiction. He should there
| fore take the matter under adviSement anC
| would announ &c at 10 o'cloc Wedne sday
forenoon whether he would take jurisdic
ton in the matter or turn 1t over to the
grand jury.