The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1900-02-06


st On Tuesday Patrick Monahan wa
i placed on trial on the charge of burning
! barn at Mount Laurel
: The evidence for the state showed tina
2 the fire started about one o'clock in tn
. morning and burned two barns. Abou
i 10 o'clock on the previous evening Mona
han was seen going toward the barn. I'm
der his arm he had bundle which wa
found later near the burned buildings
When it was opened the bundle was fount
to contain two pairs of socks, pipe ant
some tobacco. Monahan claimed tn,
package and admitted that he lighted 1
match in the barn.
The defendant denied that he struck
match. He did not acknowledge owner
ship of the bundle, but was forced to tak'
it by two men who saw him on the morn
| ing of the fire.
The jury rendered verdict of guilty.
A jury was called on Wednesday morn
ing to try the case of j. Stokes Borton VS.
Michael Carey. The trouble arose ovel
the cutting of some trees on the division
line of property belonging to the two men
in Moorestown. The jury rendered YER
dict Of $40 in favor of plaintiff. Carey
will carry the case to the higher courts.
In the Circuit court Judge Miller
heard the suit of Charles T. Mathis vs.
George E. Gusrang This was an action
to recover damages for libel. Both men
were members of the Burlington police
force, Mathis being lieutenant There
was some trouble and Gusrang was ac-
cused of carrying reports about his super
ior officer to the authorities, showing that
the lieutenant had slept while onFduty and
had absented himself from his beat with
out permission. In consequence Mathis
was suspended from the force but was
finally reinstated, but was reduced to the
ranks Mathis claimed that Gusrang had
been telling the stories against him for
the purpose of securing the lieutenancy.
Counsel for Gusrang claimed that all
testimony tending to show malice on the
part of Gusrang must be excluded as the
latter was privileged to report any dere-
LECTION in duty Judge Miller granted his
motion and nonsuit was allowed, the
ruling having removed the very pith of
the case.
Thursday morning the appeal case of
Walker Boureau, appellant, and Maurice
ties hail from Moorestown.
In October last three boys went to Rob-
erts' woods after chestnuts. While there
three young men came along and called
to the boys to get out The latter did
not obey the order and the men entered
the woods. The men did not have any
clubs and took one from the boys. Be-
fore doing this however, one of the men
struck boy, causing the latter to relin-
quish his hold of the club he had Hol-
land, the appellee, was one of the boys.
A club belonging to him was thrown into
a tree and as it came down he tried to get
it. Boureau put his foot on one end of
the club and Holland seized the other end
and attempted to secure it. Then, he and
his companions who were with him claim,
Boureau put both hands against Hollands
chest and pushed him with such force as
to cause him to fall over backwards and
break his arm
After the accident the witnesses for the
plaintiff say that although Holland lay on
the ground moaning with pain, Boureau
made no effort to aid him. On the con-
trary, when the injured lad said ''You
have broken my ARM" Boureau answered
''you are talking through your hat"
Holland went home, being compelled to
accept assistance from his companions,
boys of 70 years of age.
A physician was called and the arm was
set. The man who was charged with
causing the injury went to the house of
the boys father in the evening Of the day
of the occurrence, but there did not ap-
pear to be any anxiety on his part over
the condition of the lad. A warrant was
issued for the arrest of Boureau for as
sault and battery, but the justice did not
consider the evidence sufficient to sustain
that charge and dismissed it. The boys
father then instituted civil suit for the
injuries sustained by his son. The justice
rendered decision against Boureau for
$50, but the latter was not satisfied and
appealed the case.
The defendant claimed that no injury
was intended Every action was playful
and the accident was entirely unintention-
al Boureau did not deny that he at
tempted to keep the boy from getting
possession of the club, but said he did not
push him or lay his hands upon him. The
club was on the ground and Boureau put
his foot upon one end of it. As he did so
the boy rushed and grabbed the other
end. The ground was slippery and
the lad fell forward, landing on his
side When Holland announced that he
had broken his arm Boureau did not go to
him as he thought it was joke. Later
in the day he was spoken to by friend
who mentioned the occurrence, which,
Boureau said, had entirely faded from his
memory He then went to the boys
home and was told by the father that the
affair was in the hands of justice of the
peace The defendant denied emphat
ically that he put his hands on the boy
and disclaimed any intention of infiicting
injury upon him.
The jury rendered a verdict of no cause
of action.
In the afternoon the appeal Of Michael
Woolston from decision in Justice Clev
engers court was heard. The plaintiff in
the court below was Miss Addie Combs,
who secured judgment for 800, for act
ing as housekeeper in the Woolston fam
lily for 26 weeks. By profession Miss
Combs is dressmaker, and lived In the
Woolston family for 90 years. During
that time she paid small amount for
board, whether she was at home or
whether she was away at work. Mrs.
Woolston was taken i'll and Miss Combs
was telegraphed for to come home" and
take charge. This she did, doing nursing
and homework until the death of Mrs.
Woolston. After that event Miss Combs
remained with Michael Woolston, who