The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1899-11-02
TRIAL BY WRANGLE.
Congressman DAILY, Prose-
cutor Van Wrinkle and
Judge Blair Fight
Over Carletti.

The trial of DIR. Ignacio Carletti on an
indictment for perjury is at last on in the
Court of Quarter Sessions Why the de-
fendant was indicted under the surname
of Carletti is mystery, as the name on
his professional card and on the sign at
MS office in West E1oboken is DIR. j. Col
Ietti Reina.
The case opened with Judge Blair's de-
NAL OF the motion made yesterday by
Congressman Daily to quash the indict-
fact taking exceptions was a large part
of his occupation during the entire morn
ing session 4 jury was as sec secured rec after ter
the defence. The beginning of the trial
was marked by sharp and sometimes ac-
rimonious tilts between Congressman
DAILY and Assistant Prosecutor Van Win
kle. While the jurors were being called
Sergeant farms Mitchell stood near the
Assistant Prosecutor. When the name Of
John Kivlol was called Mr. Van Wrinkle
ssThat's s Mitchells challenger exclaim-
ed Mr.. DAILY. Then turning to the Ser
geant-at-ArmS Mr.. DAILY said
You had better mind your own busi-
Mitchells face flushed and Mr. Van
Wrinkle declared thata the Sergeant-at-
Arms had not said one word to him..
stI'Il take your word for it, said Mr..
Daily; but l wish to say that the prose-
cutor has a sufficient number OF detec-
tiveS to make 1t unnecessary Tor MltcheH
to put his oar in.
While Assistant Prosecutor Van Wrinkle
was making his opening address to the
jury Mr.. Daily Interrupted him several
times and charged that he was going out
side of the allegation set forth IN the
indictment. Sometimes ne was right an9
sometimes wrong. The indictment had
to be examined every time an objection
was made and al that consumed time. Mr.
Van Wrinkle said that the alleged perjury
was committed at the trial of suit IN
the Circuit Court on April q and rs. The
,,la fnff IN faa "
Of West Hoboken He claimed to have
been injured by being thrown from
North Hudson County Railway trolley car
through the negligence of the conductor
and motorman and he was suing the COM
pany for damages.
Dr. '.carIetteg testified at the trial
abdominal conclusion, that his that his
sixth and seventh ribs were broken and
that the breast was loosened. In his opin-
ion the injuries were permanent ana tne
patient would never recover He also
that at time the time of the trial. he still
found the fracture of the ribs rms was
the perjury, Mr.. Van Winlzle said, as the
ribs, If they had ever been fractured,
were then healed up.
Deputy County Clerk Edward w. Grit
ten, was the first witness called and he'
produced the records Of the trial IN me
Judge Henry M. Nevius came up from
the Circuit Court and testified that the
trial took place before ~ him; me witness Wit =
him by the Assistant Prosecutor, VINO
off cred it to be marked for identincatlon.
LET me see that paper demanded Mr
DAILY
read it he exciaimed:-
Il protest / object to this paper being
offered in evidence 1t IS simply an
Mr. Van Wrinkle protested against the
word infamous and said that the paper
had not been offered in evidence; Mr.;
DAILY continued to object vigorously ana
Judge Blair remarked to Mr.. Daily that
the paper had not gone to the jury ana
the offering of it for Identification could
do no harm. II was allowed 70 be marked
for Identification and Mr.. DAILY. took an
exception. Mr.. Van Wrinkle said it was
his intention to offer it in evidence il the
defence attempted to show that ths5 case
Is being prosecuted by the North HUDSON
County Railway Company and not by the
State. What the paper contained was mol
'i'isds Edward ard W. wray, the stenographer
who took the testimony in the Circuit
Court. was called to give from his steno-
graphic notes the testimony of the defen-
dant Mr. DAILY objected to nearly every
Blair invariably overruled the objections
Mr.. Van Wrinkle said that Mr.. DAILY was
only nagging and that he was insulting
in his remarks
Blair finally interfered. He said that It
was a plain, ordinary case and could
easily be tried according to the ruler. He
said that Mr. Da1y's remarks and com
ments were made for the purpose OF af-
fecting the jury. They were an insult TO
the court and jury and would not De
further tolerated.
Mr.. DAILY replied that his only object was
TO have the case tried legally. The case
was still on at recess.