Bridgeton pioneer. (Bridgeton, N.J.) 1884-1919, 1898-05-12

the victim of the assault, it having oc-
Cured on the 4th day of April, almost
nine O'Clock at night. Miss Fox recog-
nized the defendant as her assailant She
was better enabled to establish the iden-
tity from the fact that Poland, on March
9th, had visited the house and wanted
something to eat.
Further proof was adduced by those
who went to the assistance of Miss Fox,
when they learned of her trouble The
tracks made by the assialant We're easily
distinguishable, and one of the tracks
was taken up with the earth, and was
produced in box in the court room
The track was very plain, and a shoe
taken from Poland filled it exactly.
Poland had been seen in the vicinity
that day by several persons, and yet
when he was arrested, he denied that he
ever been in that locality. Several con-
Trajectory stories We're shown as having
been told by the defendant, and the
States case rested.
Tuesday Afternoon.
< Court to-day was not fruitful of many
results that We're interesting or sensa-
tional.
only two cases were taken up, and one
OF them was very shallow, the jury ar
irving at a conclusion without the fer
mality of retiring.
In the matter of Andrew Poland.
charged with feloniously assaulting Mary
E. Fox, the jury learned sufficient from
both sides to make question that re-
qu1red considerable time for an answer,
The State had by direct and circumstan-
colored man that made it somewhat diff
cult for him to extricate himself.
His own story was told with an air of
trankness. He explained that he was
twenty years old, and was originally
from Virginia. Ignorant in the extreme,
being unable to either read or write,
he drifted north, and arrived in Bridge
ton some two months before he was
placed under arrest.
On the day of the alleged assault he
went to Deerfield about noon, and stop
ped at Mrs Barrae liff'>, remain n tn re
until nearly five O'Clock. He then went
to Albert Tice's, and inquired for work.
He went north little further. In the
evening he returned to Bridgeton. The
police had detailed the story of his subse-
quent movements.
Prosecutor Logue made very rigid
cross-examination, and yet Poland was
able to keep his story as originally told.
intact.
Mrs. Phebe Barracliff and Mr.. AL.
Tice both corroborated that part of
Poland's story relative to his visit to their
homes.
Minor testimony was addnced, and the
jury took the case.
Ruth Reeves, fair defendant, was
next called upon, to answer an indict-
ment charging her with the illegal sale of
liquor. There was nothing in the case.
and the jury arrived at verdict without
leaving their chairs.
The facts, condensed in nut shell. are
these: Mrs. Reeves boarded at the home
of her sister, Mary Simms. The latter
has already pleaded guilty to selling
liquor without license, and keeping a
aisorderly house. Prosecutor Loeue had
abundance of evidence against the house
but the testimony showed that Mrs.
simms, and not Mrs. Reeves, conducted
The establishment. Acquittal quickly
followed.
Court adjourned for the night.
Wednesday Morning,
prosecutor Logue called the case of
James Turner at the opening of Court
ms morning. Turner is charged with
iiegal dredging. Turner was represented
~ Hon. Thos. w. Trenchard and Samuel
-reoeii, Esq. Turner was charged with
aklng oysters from rrround. Stakod nff