Bridgeton pioneer. (Bridgeton, N.J.) 1884-1919, 1898-01-27

fagan told him that the men started after
MIN, one had knife in his hand and he
thought they were going to kill him and
he shot, but didn't know he had hit any,
body. He said the men didn't say
word, but come up and threw them over
board.
They did not try to get away, but told
the justice everything about it, Carfagan
told about the shooting to the justice.
Ihey had been in Jail seventeen months
and twenty-one days.
Mr.. Logue soon closed his case after
this evidence, and up to date the matter
had all gone one way. 1t certainly
seemed TO impress the people generally
that Carfagan fired the shot in fear, and
that the wounding of Bradford was per-
fectly justifable
Mr.. Trenchard made thorough open
ing explaining the case of the defeb.s.
and explained the law as he understood
it, and proceeded to give his testimony by
the various witnesses subpened in the
interest of the defendant.
Carfagan told his story in a simple.
straightforward manner, indicating hon
esty. Even the sharp cross-examinatson
OF Prosecutor Logue made no material
differences in the original story, which
was the same as last May. His story was
told through an Interpreter.
Carfagan said his home was in Phila-
deiphia, and he supported his wife and
father.
Squire Compton was called to show
that Bradford declared he would not have
been shot if he hadn't been there.
John Peterson testified that young
Bradford had proclaimed that he would
burn down the shanty where these Ital-
ians lived.
There were various other witnesses
| called, and it all bore upon the same line,
namely that the shooting was in self de-
tense, and that it is quite likely that there
would have been no trouble at all had it
not been that the Italians were uncere.
mcniously attacked by the Newport
boys.
The argument was soon presented by
both Mr.. Trenchard and Prosecutor. the
Court made the charge and the jury re
tired.
All the jurors were then discharged un.
til Monday morning at ten o'clock, when
Court sessions will be resumed.
1t was not thought that the jury would
be out but short time before returning
a.verdict of not guilty, but contrary to
expectations hours went by and there
seemed to be no probability Of a, sAs-ee
nient.
1t was not until half-paet eleven o'clocl
this morning that an agreement wa
reported. and the jury returned verdic
of not guilty.
Monday Morning.
Court resumes this morning, after
vacation of Saturday and Sundays quiet
Judge Hoagland seldom calls petit jur
ors for duty on Monday but there is st
much to be done this term that every
possible moment. must. be utilized in or
der to get the business through with.
The spectators were confronted will
Judge Thompson, of Atlantic county, OF
the bench in Judge Hoagland's place
The Court room was crowded to heal
what they anticipated the celebrated oys
ter trial.
"Mr. Prosecutor, have you a cast
ready?" asked Judge Thompson.
1.-The State against John and Jane,
-Crowell for the larceny of oysters" re-
piled the Prosecutor.
Thus the opening of the famous Orono
ken Oyster Company's case against al
lodged illegal tongers began.
Hon. Eugene Cole and Samuel Bender
represented the defense.
Ajury was selected. The State made
four challenges and the defense five.
Mr.. Bender called on the Court to ask
the jury if any one of them belonged tc
the Oronoken Oyster Company. The
Court did so and finding that none OF
them belonged to the Company, ordered
the jury sworn.
Prosecutor Logue then opened the case
to the jury. He said that John and James
Crowell were on trial for the taking OF
one hundred dollars worth of oysters
from the Oronoken Co. That in April,
1896, company formed and is known as
the Oronoken Oyster Company, which
was formed for the purpose of planting
years 5000 or 5000 acres of marsh, which
included Oronoken and Fishing Creeks.
Monday Afternoon.
We have had day of oysters, of tong
erS, of Judge Thompson, of Assembly
man Cole, together with the various
other trimmings that go to making up a
days Court proceedings.
AS for Judge Thompson. it can be said
that all of us who were in the court room
liked him. He is smooth, judicial, and
absolutely impartial. He does not seem
harsh at any time, and his decisions
carry conviction at once. He does not
meddle with the evidence. He didn't
even in the charge he made to the jury,
simply dwelling upon the law in the case.
AS for Cape Mays Assemblyman, we
found him most interesting, He is
small bundle of whirlwind and excite