Bridgeton pioneer. (Bridgeton, N.J.) 1884-1919, 1893-05-04

Supreme Court issue No. 8, was
John Marie Averet VS. Joseph Pahl
and Marie Pahl. The plaintiff is a
Fren Gilman, and he can understand
! very little English, and there not be-
Ing an interpreter, there was much
trouble experienced In obtaining from
him testimony, and finally Philadei-
phian, Prof. Malan was introduced
and sworn as interpreter.
Through him the story was told.
Averet had lived with his sister and
brother-in-law, the defendants, In 1885
on farm and worked for them for
$40 per month. He never collected
his wages and now claims that Is due
him $1O2OS2.
In 1892 Averet took a wife unto
himself and Of course wants his money.
W. Berault was counsel for Averet,
and he attempted to show up Pahl in
manner to his detriment, and greatly
to the benefit of his client. He pro-
duced papers to show that Pahl had
signed a paper ackno wledging this
debt.
The defense of Pahl and his wife
was general denial of all that the
plaintiff had attempted to prove.
Pahl claimed that he did not come to
this country until after the date that
Averet said he began working for him
on his farm In North Yineland. Pahl
claimed that Averet came to his farm
and lived as member of his family,
Averet being Mrs. Pahl's brother. He
made no bargain with Averet to work
for him, and the latter simply lived on
the place and did not attempt to work
at all. In fact, 1t was claimed there
was nothing to do.
PAIL further went on to say that
Averet tried to get in a position in
New York but could not because he
could not speak the English language.
PAIL, however, went to New York se-
cured a position, got money for his
labor and sent it to his wife to support
her and her brother.
In 1892 Averet became q married
man, and then came trouble in the
family. Averet became ugly, and
there was a quarrel Then Averet
made up an account against Pahl on a
piece of paper, and producing it, de-
clared that if PAIL did not sign paper
acknowledging the debt, he would
throw PAIL from fourth story win
dow. PAIL in fear of his life, signed
the paper, but he now disputes the
bill and declares that Averet is In his
debt rather than be In the debt of
Averet.
The wife of Pahl corroborated her
husbands statements in every partic-
ular.
Henry 8. Alvord was counsel for
Pahl, and at the conclusion of the
case the jury retired for deliberation.
WEDNESDAY MORNING.
A stenographer appeared in Court
this morning, and after a very short
time the case of Edward Paxton vs..
the Cumberland Glass Manufacturing
Company, was called. The list implies
1t to be in Tort, which means q suit
for damages. The sum fixed upon Is
SIC, 900, which Paxton thinks he should
have from the Company, owing to ser.
ious injuries he received while en-
ployed by it, In the oil room of the
plant.
The case will be one of the best
fought to be tried at this term. For
Paxton, Judge Westcott, of Camden,
and Hon. T. w. Trenchard appear
as counsel.
The interests of the Company will
be carefully looked after by Col. VIM.
E. Potter.
There was much trouble experienced
in selecting jury for the trial of the
cause. John Simpkins was discharged
because he admitted under oath that
he had been twice discharged from
the Cumberland Works, and once from
the Bridgeton Iron Works, of which
@. w. Shoemaker is an owner.
Benz Headley was thoroughly ex-
amined In his connection with the
American Flint Glass Union by Col,
Potter, and the young man appealed
to the Court, pleading that he had
taken an oath not to reveal the secrets.
1t was shown that the organization
was opposed to the non-union, how
ever, and he was discharged. Isaac
Kincaid suffered the same fate, he be-
ing a union glass worker. Others
were sworn and interrogated. Col.
Potter made three premptory chal-
lenges, and Judge Westcott. two. The
jury as finally sworn, was as follows:
Albert L. Williams. Joseph Naylor,
Robt. Christy, William Henderson,
Thomas Conover, Peter johnson
Horace Kilborn, Seth B. Hustled, VIM.