The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1902-12-13
Defendants story of Alleged Assault
Varies Greatly from that Told
by the Plaintiff.
ALTERATION IN CORRIDOR
SUBJECTS JUDGE THOMAS
BUSKIRK TO CRITICISM.
The Latter's Testimony WAS Not
Agreeable to Him-May Go to the
Jury Monday Night.

Before the defense rested its case yester-
day in the Federal Court in the trial of
David A Jennings for 10000 damages for
alleged assault against certain citizens of
Salem few of the defendants were placed
on the stand, and their testimony as to
the actual occurrences the night of
Jan. 30, 1900. when Jennings was waylaid,
was quite different from the story told by
Jennings. John ID. Avis. named as
Of the defendants, but who the evidence
has shown not in the party that way
laid Jennings, testified that there was an
iron fence around Jennings's property in
Salem instead of a wooden fence, as was
testified TO by some of the plaintiffs wit
nesses
Bevity T. Pace, a defendant, denied the
story told by Jennings that he (Pace) had
been implored to protect Jennings the night
of the alleged assault Mr. Pace said Jen-
nings made no appeal to him. as there was
no occasion for It, He also denied that he
wore a mask or that any one in the crowd
was masked. Asa Elliott, Volney T. Reed,
Eli w. Menaugh and Mr.. Pace. all of whom
are defendants. denied that there We're any
threats made against Jennings on the night
in question. and further denied that Jen-
They said a demand was made for the
pamphlets but violence was attempted.
Mr.. Reed and Mr.. Elliott, who were in
the party that went to Jenningss home be-
fore Jennings was waylaid, and who were
charged by Mrs. Jennings in her testimony
of having threatened to break down the
doors and house unless she gave them the
pamphlets, denied that they used any
threats to Mrs. Jennings. Other testimony
was introduced TO show that the evidence
of Jennings. Mrs. Jennings and the Jen-
nings boy was not correct. Jennings stated
that when he went to his house with the
crowd he asked his daughter to omen the
door and that his desk where the pamphlets
were secreted locked. Mr.. Reed and
Mr.. Elliott said that Jennings did not ask
his daughter to open the door. but walked
story that he had TO search for the KEYS
was not true, as the desk was unlocked.
DISPOSITIONS READ.
A number of dispositions were read by the
defendants attorneys during the morning
session and several character witnesses
were examined. Judge Thomas Buskirk.
of Paoli, testified that Jennings's reputa-
ton while a resident of Salem was bad.
When he left the stand Jennings met him
in the corridor and accused Judge Buskirk
of testifying falsely against him. Judge
Buskirk said he was then under the juris-
diction of the Federal Court and would
not get into an alteration with jennings
Quite a crowd gathered around the two and
when Jennings became more abusive Judge
Buskirk walked away.
The defense finished it's side of the case
during the afternoon and Attorney Rocker
began examining witnesses to show that
Jennings bore a good reputation while a
resident of Salem. Among the character
witnesses for Jennings were John r.
Sutherlin. William f. Potter, H. o.
Painter, John Rudman, Thomas b. Cauble
Harriet Prov. William b. Buttorff and
Claude Painter. They all said Jennings
had good reputation for moral character,
truth and veracity. Thomas b. Cauble ad-
mitted on cross-examination that HIS ac-
counts as treasurer of the county showed
a shortage of about s2,1O0 and said Jen-
nfngs, gave note to help make
good the shortage, but left Salem
without paying it. Part of the wit
nesses claimed they had never heard of
Jennings having been convicted at Salem
for whipping his child and on other
/ charges. William b. Buttorff made a poor
witness for Jennings as he admitted that
| a man who had acted as Jennings was
/ charged with conducting himself could not
/ be very moral man.
| Ii looks now as IL the case would go to
/ the jury Monday evening. There has been
an impression among those who have fol-
| lowed the case that should the jury give
Jennings damages for any amount the de-
PENDANTS would have to pay the cost. This
is not true. The jury would have to give
| Jennings at least $500 damages before the
cost of the trial could be assessed against
the defendants.