Bridgeton pioneer., 1894-02-01
Wilmer cashed at the Bridgeton Bank

Wilmer cashed at the Bridgeton Bank
and putting the bills In an envelope
handed II to Pierce, who was working
for him and told him it was money to
deliver to Charles. Wilmer then went
on to Camden, and two days later be
heard from Charles that he had never
received any money. When Isaac was
asked about the matter he said that he
bad lost the money. The bills were in
$40 and IS denominations.
Upon cross examination Wilmer said
that he had entrusted Pierce with
money upon previous occasions, and
the defendant had not proved die
honest.
Upon redirect examination the wit
ness said he had missed the money at
Joel Pierce's store In this city. At an
other time he had said he had first
missed the money at the Fairton
blacksmith shop.
Charles Elmer said that Pierce was
to bring him the money after Wilmer
had drawn it from the bank. Pierce
returned in the afternoon and came In
smiling and told Charles that he had
bad luck, and had lost the money. He
claimed that he lost it through hole
in bis overcoat pocket. He told Chas.
that he lost the money at Haven's
store on South East avenue. In the
evening of the day he was arrested he
said he lost the money at Joel Pierce's
store on South avenue. Pierce had
said he never asked anybody If they
had found the money, nor had he told
any body that he had lost the money.
The evidence produced by the State
seemed to be satisfactory to the defen-
dant, and O gden Burt, COUNSEL for the
defense simply made short argument
to the jury and submitted his case.
After the arfiument of the Prosecu-
tor, the charge by the Court, the jury
retired.
All other Jurors were discharged for
the term.
The Jury in the case of Isaac Pierce
remained out couple of hours, and
finally returned a verdict of guilty,
with recommendation of mercy.
Judge Hoagland announced that
the court had fixed Monday February
18th, as the time when all unheard ap
peal cases would be taken mp. All per-
sons Interested in the appeal cases will
be present on the occasion without
further notice.
John 8. Mitchell, Esq, addressed
the Court, and said that he desired to
show to the Court that in the case of
the State against Max Schuck of
Millyille, charged with selling liquor
Illegally, there was lack of intent to
commit crime. He argued in his open
ing that Schuck had received from
the County Excise Commissioners H.
cense to sell liquor at his hotel in Mill
vile. The license was granted In May
1898, and in November the Supreme
Court decided the Excise act uncon-
stitutional, and for few days the
hotel proprietor continued selling,
which Mr.. Mitchell admitted was
technical violation Of the law, although
there was no criminal intent. Mr..
Schuck entered plea of 1,oa-Uult con-
tendre, and Mr.. Mitchell offered to
show testimony why the defendent
shonld not be punished as criminal.
MIR. Schuck, himself, was sworn. and
said that he was the owner of a large
hotel in Millville, and the County Ex-
else Commissioners had given him a IL
cense to sell, In November the 18th,
he received notice from Mayor
Whitaker, to close his place, and he
did so Immediately.
He produced his license papers and
the notice from the Mayor. Upon
cross examination Mr.. Logue elicted
from Max that he had violated the law
eight days after he had knowledge of
the Supreme Courts decision, and
further that he had sold after he had
been arrested once upon complaint OF
Thomas Ludlam.
A whole lot of witnesses were called,
showing that Mr.. Schuck bore q good
reputation, and his place was we'll
kept.
Mr.. Mitchell made an eloquent plea
for his client, and urged that the Court
suspend sentence In this case.
Prosecutor Logue said that Mr.. Nit
chel's remarkable power of shifting
his ground In these cases, challenged
his admiration. In the morning Mr..
Mitchell argued strongly before the
Court that the License Commission
did not exist, and had never existed
as officers. Now he pleaded for client
because he was doing what these Com
misaiOnnrs had uivoo hin, a rJ~hk -