The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1899-02-07
Cnnrf.

corn from Eugene F. Bowker, in Shannon;
township. The corn was in the stack AM
field and as it was fast disappearing, MI
Bowker decided to watch for the person
who was getting away with it. His frs
step was to search for the missing proper
! ty He claimed to have found some of
in Fosters barn, and there were lot 0
husks under the barn. The corn was O
the white variety and was easily identi
fed. In company with one of his farm
hands, Mr.. Bowker watched the field ant
saw two men enter. One of them he rec
ognized as Foster by the voice. TIL,
other man he did not know The next day
half barrel of white corn was found il
Fosters barn. Mr.. Bowker claimed tina
this was not Fosters first offence.
The defence was an alibi. HannaI
Simons, Fosters housekeeper, testified
! that the latter was not out of the house OF
the night it was said he was in the corn
| field. The defendant said he bought hi.
corn from a man named Crane and tina
found in his barn was some that he hac
purchased.
Blanchard II. White defended Foster
and conducted the case in such a manner
as to cause the jury to remain out al
night and to finally be discharged because
they could not agree.
William R. Porter was then placed on
trial for assault and battery. The plain
tiff in this case was James D. Williamson,
who works in stocking factory at River
side He was driving to his home when
his carriage came in collision with that of
Porter. An alteration followed, in which
Porter struck Williamson and BACKED his
eye.
The defence claimed the blow was
struck by man who was in the carriage
with Porter, but who lived in Philadel-
phia The jury rendered al verdict of
guilty with recommendation to mercy.
The appeal case of William Rogers, APP
pellant, and Josiah Stewart, appellee, was
tried on Thursday before Judge Gaskill
and jury. This was to recover the val
ue of wheat sold to Rogers, who was act
ing as agent for Samuel Woolman, of
Philadelphia. Stewart got judgment in
the trial below. The defence was that
the wheat was not according to sample,
that it was weevileaten and besides the
contract was void, as it was made on Sun
day. This Stewart denied, and said the
whole trouble was due to the fact that the
market price of wheat dropped immedi-
ately after Rogers bought it. Jerome B.
Grigg was counsel for Rogers; George M.
Hillman for Stewart. The jury rendered
a verdict in favor of Stewart for the full
amount claimed.
Saturday was the time fixed for passing
sentences, and the court room was crowd
ed to hear what disposition was to be
made of the chicken thieves who had been
infesting this neighborhood for some time
Judge Gaskill requested counsel who
were interested in any of the prisoners to
make their pleas.
OdCOO " lChoOA w do luC nISb w
respond He represented Charles Dough
erty, indicted for stealing poultry. He is
but IS years of age and resides in Camden
This is his first offence. Dougherty
claimed to have been induced to commit
the crime by the others who were in the
work. Shemeley was the main man and
told Dougherty how slick he was in chick
en- stealing and agreed to show the prison
er nice job. The defendant said he had
never been in any such business before.
William A. Slaughter spoke in behalf
of Budd Harmon, whose previous record
he claimed to be good. But for the in
tluence of Shemeley, Harmon would not
be in the position he now occupies. Mr.
Slaughter also pleaded in behalf of Charles
Flora, and for John Jennings The latter
was convicted of stealing harness. He
claimed to have received the harness from
a companion and since his incarceration in
the Jail here had taken steps to restore the
property to it's owner.
George M. Hillman represented Richard
Wells, who was indicted for entering a
house in Bridgeboro' and stealing a watch
and other goods. The watch was after
wards recovered. Mrs. Garwood did not
care to press the case, but some of her
neighbors told her she would be amenable
to the law herself if she allowed it to rest,
so she had the man apprehended. Wells
was under the influence of liquor at the
time he did the deed. Mr.. Hillman also
asked the leniency Of the court in the case
of Robert Flamer, who stole some spoons
from the house of DIR. Sharp, at Riverton.
Planners wife was engaged in washing at
the house and he called for her. He was
under the influence of liquor. When he
reached the place his wife had gone, but
he did not know it, and entered the place
in search of her. The spoons were on
table and he picked them up. Mrs. Sharp
came in and discovered him and had him
arrested The property was recovered at
once.
Micajah E. Matlack asked for suspen-
sion of sentence in the case of William r.
Porter convicted of assault and battery
Mr.. Matlack's contention was that Porter
was not the guilty man, but was in the
company of the person who did commit
the assault. The latter lives in Philadel-
phia and hence escaped arrest, so Porter
was made the scapegoat. In support of
his claim for clemency, Mr.. Matlack pre-
sented petition signed by several citizens
of Burlington and by Benajah P. Wills, a
member of the grand jury that indicted
Porter.
Prosecutor Budd made a general reply
to all these pleas. In the cases that
had been heard in open court, where the
testimony was before the Judge, he would
not make any extended remarks. In the
matter of thefts of poultry he felt it to be
his duty to speak at length The people
of this community had been annoyed and
molested to such degree that it was i'm
perative for summary punishment to be
imposed He alluded to the confessions
of some of the gang and suggested elem
ency to those who had materially aided
the state. The others, he said, should be
given a sentence which would be felt by
them.
Judge Gaskill then proceeded to pro-
nounce sentences. The first man called to
the railing was Charles Giles, colored
man who was charged with the unlawful
taking of horse and wagon belonging to
Jacob w. Gaskill, of Jacksonville The
team was in Bordentown and Giles took