The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1897-05-25

On Thursday the case of Joseph Vogt
appellant, vs. Minnie Schwalber, admin
istratrix, &C., appellee, was tried before
Judge Gaskill. George M. Bacon repre-
sented the plaintiff, and G. E. Hendrick.
son the defendant.
This is an action to recover 1872 for work
done about the premises of Charles J
Schwalber, deceased, of Riverside, from
August to October, 1890.
Joseph Vogt, Riverside farmer, testi
fed that he knew deceased; that he was
man OF means, cultivated a garden and
at times needed help about his place
Regina lnman was housekeeper for de-
ceased, who, she said, employed Vogt tc
work for him at various times. Heard
plaintiff at one time ask for So, which he
did not get Schwalber died without
paying Vogt the money due him.
On cross examination Mr.. Hendrickson
brought out the fact that Regina had sup
planted Mrs. Schwalber in the affections
of her husband, and that when the latter
came from Philadelphia to reside at River.
side, witness lived with him. She was q
beneficiary under his will and this was
contested in a suit brought IN Philadel.
phla.
Andrew Mantz carted several loads Of
grape posts for deceased on October %
1890, for which service he was never paid.
Mr.. Hendrickson then showed witness
what he claimed was a receipt for the
money. His signature was at the bottom,
but he declared it was a bill improperly
made out, and that his name was put
there simply to show to whom the mon.
ey was due.
Lena Vogt said that Schwalber came to
her home on August IA, and engaged hel
father to do some work for him. Witness
saw her father working for deceased a
number of times from August to October.
Schwalber was at her house the night be-
fore he died, and she heard him ask her
father how much he owed him 1872 was
the sum named, and deceased said he
would pay when he got the money, but
he died before settling.
Barbara Deitche, who worked for de.
ceased in Philadelphia. said Vogt was his
hired man at the time of death. She was
not much of farmer herself and did not
know what Vogt did about the premises.
Mr.. Hendrickson, in opening for the
defence, said that he would prove that
Vogt received pay for his service, and
that the work he alleged to haye done at
the time mentioned was performed year
that Schwalber and his housek eeper did
most of the work required.
Hannah Schwalber said her father died
November Is, 1890, Witness then lived
in Philadelphia. She visited Riverside
on July 4, and found everything planted,
fences well in order and things looked in
good shape. She did not visit her father
because ''that woman" was there.
William Schwalber, of Philadelphia,
said his brother moved to Riverside in
1888. In 1889 the trees and grapes, were
planted, and in 1890, when visiting the
place, everything look well. He never
saw Vogt working there. Deceased al
ways had plenty of money and paid his
bills promptly.
Emma Tuch, brother, lived next to
the Schwalbers. She is an artificial flow
er maker, and worked great deal at the
window, which gave her an opportunity
to see who was employed in the yard She
rather strengthened the plaintiffs case by
admitting that she had seen Vogt
Christian Dick said he had received $75
for grape posts sold Deceased had plenty
of money and paid him in gold
August Schwalber testified that he and
his brother put up the grape posts after
their fathers death, and when the counsel
again asked concerning the appearance of
the place, Mr. Bacon said 1--WE admit that
the premises was complete paradise at
that time"
The jury returned a verdict for the
plaintiff without interest.
The next case was that of Charles T.
Woolston, appellant, vs. Sallie R. Lean
ing, appellee. c. E. Hendrickson and
George M. Bacon were the opposing coun-
sell
Nathan H. Moore worked for Mr..
Woolston at Riverton. Through Freder-
lex II. Blackburn, a real estate agent,
Moore rented house in 1894 of the ap-
pellee. 1t was rented for one month and
Mr.. Woolston became responsible for the
rent, which accumulated to $40 Counsel
for plaintiff was compelled to try the case
without his witnesses being present.
The court could not see how the plaintiff
could recover for more than one month
and the jury was instructed to render q
verdict in favor of defendant. Time was
given counsel in which to file motion
for new trial.
The grand jury will meet this morning
and present the indictments which they
found two weeks ago, after which they
probably will retire and give considera-
ton to several more cases.
The criminal business will commence
tomorrow morning