Bridgeton pioneer. (Bridgeton, N.J.) 1884-1919, 1901-05-23
The Weary Routine of the May
Term Drags Along.
THE JUDGES SENTENCES.
Important Gases Heard-Facemyre
Gets Heavy Sentence = Meyer
Wasman Goes to Jail.
Wednesday Morning.

1SGUy muCIl dll VI JIllS AFTERNOON S
session of the Court was taken ND
with the concluding evidence in the
indictment of Sarah and Mary Webb,
charged with keeping a disorderly
house. The State had finished up its
case before the noon adjournment,
and when the afternoon session con-
vened, John S. Mitchell, ESQ.,, the
counsel for the defendant opened for
the defense. He held strongly that
the two women were not guilty, and
the evidence he presented was directly
conflicting with the story told by the
witnesses of the State, and the jury
believed the defendants, for after
being out about twenty minutes a YER
dict OF not guilty was returned.
Mrs. Sarah Webb, one of the de-
PENDANTS was first called in her own
defense. She told of having had Wis
itors but declared that her house was
not house of i'll fame or that woman
of notorious character were there.
The ginger, that State witnesses had
testified, had been drank, was not
ginger but lemon soda.
Drunken men called occasionally
but witness would not let them in.
Said she done washing to earn liv-
ing.
Robert Corson was the next witness.
He knew the defendants, had known
them for several years. Said he
called occasionally to see the daugh-
ter. Never had seen prostitutes at
the house. Never saw drunken men
there. Knew Mrs Webb worked and
took in washing to support herself
and daughter. On cross examination
witness said he only knew of Mrs.
Webb taking in washing one time.
Mary Webb, the daughter and one
of the defendants, was called to tes-
tify. The house has not been the
resort of men she said, except few
who called on properly. No bad
women ever called at the Webb house.
Never drank beer or ginger there.
At the conclusion OF the taking of
testimony counsel presented argu-
ments and the jury retired after the
charge from Judge Trenchard, and
the verdict was as stated
The case following was one that
came down from the January term,
but was not tried at the time
The indictment was against Daniel
Everingham, the charge, assault and
battery. The defendant was repre-
sented by John S. Mitchell.
The initial witness was a twelve
year-old boy, Lewis Murphy, who
had been assaulted by Everingham,
by burning with hot glass in factory
here.
The boy said he shut moulds at a
glass factory for Everingham.
Everingham said if I spoiled any
more bottles he would burn me. I
couldn't help spelling another one
and he then threw the hot glass
around my neck and head as he said
he would do. It burned me badly
and Guy Ross pulled the glass off my
head and Mr.. Hustled attended nv
burns. I quit work then and have
not been to work since
Guy Ross was then called. Said he
was working at the time the Murphy
boy was burned near where the burn
ing took place. He took the glass
from the boys neck. Saw the burn.
Witness explained the position of the
moulds and workmen were in. He
said it was not necessary to raise the
glass and pipe over the boys head to
cool the pipe, and that the bucket
was only two feet away from the
moulds.
Ross said it was not necessary to
pull the thread of glass over the bows
head in order to cool the pipe
Mrs. Murphy, mother of the how
told of the burns being very serious
She saw Everingham afterward and
he said first he burned the bow be-
cause the boy cursed him. Later at
the hearing, Everingham said he
burned the boy but did not do il in
tentionally.
Edward Griner, who worked as a
partner of Eyeringham, saw him
burn the boy. Said Everingham had
no cause to pull the pipe toward the
boy, as it was customary to pull the
pipe toward himself. He saw Ever
ingham pull the pipe out and push it
over the boys head and stretch the