The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1900-01-25
80
TIL trial |! 1 ]. . (l ] /
Pc | [ Ed YOUTH Q
Ernest Cham er1ai1l Was
Found Guilty
TVELV We Y EARS OLD.
] But ne IS Proficient in the Use Of
Profane Language,
HIS FATHER PAYS the 6: FINE.
: .---:--.----.--- ----.-.-----
The Trial Consumed Thrce Hours
Exhaustive Arguments ON Botlh
Sides Of the Case Testimony
| OF Profes.or Williams aad
| the scholars-Ni Mayor
starritt Talks.
But ne IS Proficient IN the Use Of
Profane Language.
HIS FATHER PAYS the FINE. e:

81 The trial Of Ernest Chamberlain, son
of Mr.. John Chamberlain. OF Barton
Heights, who was charged with throwing
cursins his former teacher. Professor r.
Wesley Williams. was concluded last
night. after long and exhaustive aTgu-
ments for both the plaintin aui defence.
The deliberations consumed about three
hours, and 1t was about II O'clock when
Mayor ]. w. starritt rendered his de-
cision.
The schooLroom, in which the .rial was
conducted, was crowded with spectators.
both from Richmond and Earscn
Heights. Young Chamberlain, MS father,
and his attorney, Mr.. Harry e. Glenn.
were seated In one of the front sef:Ee.s,
while Mr.. Williams and his attorney. Mr.
W c. Darlington, of Snlithviilef were
seated to the left Of Mayor Starritt Mr..
W. tI. Beveridge represented the Com
monweaith In the case.
EXAMINATION OF MIR. WILLIAMS.
The examination of Mr.. r. Wesley w
liams, the teacher. elected almost
same facts as have already been publish
ed In The Times.
He was asked by Mr. Glenn the scrne
questions In regard to throwing the rocks.
as heretofore have been published.
..Do ycu think that you did right to-
whip that boy @" asked Mr. Glenn.
1T don't know: I am not sure about
that Mr. Williams replied. seemingly
asitated over, the pointed questions put
to him.
Mr. Williams said that young Chani-
berlatn was Indirectly connected wtth ms
school,: that the. boy had been saspeIidst,z
but had not been expelled. ani tfat tEe
school BOARD could have reinstatsd I'm
on tile condition that the hoy weuil be-
lave himself Mr.. Williams also stated
that he would not have whippeI ,he 10y
IL he had thought that any one else would
take up the case and have the boy pun
ished
Several stones. it is claimed, were
thrown By the coy at the building. but
the stone which seems to have caused
him to get the whipping was the one
which hit the front door. when Mr. VII
liarns caught the boy and carried nm
into the school-house. where he dealt
him about sixteen ticks across his back
and legs.
LANGUAGE THE BOY USED.
MIR. Williams, in testifying as to the
language used by the boy. termed It
..profane obscene. vulgar, and fnde-s
H. H.
by the Mayor, ITO repeat such words as he
heard the boy utter.
Sidney watkins. one of the scholars
| corroboratef CTR. Williams statements IN
so far as they pertained to the cursing.
throwing of stones. ard the place OF the
boy when the stones were thrown
Tom Farley. another scholar, testified
tthat he saw Chamberlain throw a stone
| after he had received the whipping
Did you hear the whipping asked
Mr.. Glenn
| IT didn't hear the lashes, but heard
thf, hol,erins.,' replied Farley.
At this juncture Mr.. Carrlnston asked
to rest the case In order to bring IN re-
buttaf testimony
Young Chambeclain was put on the
stand.
Ernest. said Mayor Starritt, you are
charged with throwing stones ana using
profane language to Mr. .Wtlliams.
The boy testified that he was oaasen
with stick. but denied having cursed
Mr. Williams.
In reply to question as to why Mr.
/ Williams whipped MIN and what he 1'sd
to the teacher after he was whipped. the
boy said:
..AlI I told him was that he had better
/ not try Il any more
.sWhy did you throw the stones. asked
Mr.. Darlington.
of my hand. didn't intend TO hit 1as
school 3.
NEVER THREW STONES BEFORE
The boy testified that he has been
i