Bridgeton pioneer., 1902-10-30

to make him suspicious. Being a
chicken raiser himself and knowing
OF numerous robberies he became in
terested, his interest leading to the
arrest of the defendants. The Doctor
told of the hole in the ground and of
the feathers in it. The hole was COW
cred over with leaves and dirt.
Constable Joseph Chester testified
on behalf of the State and then Robert
Parvin was called and testified that
his barn had been robbed on the night
OF August 8th. The stolen articles
were afterwards found at the Face
mlres' Mr.. Parvin's place is near to
the farm of Mr.. johnson and the rob-
berry occurred on the night that Mr..
Johnson's chickens were taken.
Aaron Smith, police officer, testified
to seeing Moses Facemire and his
wife in Bridgeton with a lot of
dressed chickens which they offered
for sale at divers poultry store.
The State rested it's case and Mr..
Burt took up the argument before the
jury in behalf of his clients without
introducing any evidence.
Immediately after the noon recess
the jury in the case of Thomas Tuthill
returned verdict of not guilty to
charge of abusing livery rig of Mr..
Willis.
The jury in the Facemire chicken
stealing case found Moses and Wilbert
guilty as charged. Albert Facemire
also tried on same charge, was ac-
quilted by order of Court on lack of
evidence.
Prosecutor Fithian moved the trial
OF the State against Trial Westeott
for larceny. The defendant was
brought in from Jail, a jury was
drawn but before the twelve men
were sworn the defendant retracted
former plea of not guilty and entered
one of guilty. This disposed of the
matter in short order and the Jury
were held for the next case, which
was that of State against George
Hughes, charged with the removal of
household goods without first having
acquired title to them.
Lafayette Weaver was sworn and
testified that the defendant had come
to his furniture store on North Laurel
street and bought goods amounting tc
S5o23 on January 1st. The goods
were bought on the installment plan,
Mr.. Hughes paying 81 down at the
time. Under the terms of the agree
ment Mr.. Hughes was to pay ST.. sc
a week until the full amount was
paid. when title was to pass. Defend.
ant was not permitted, under the in.
stallment agreement, to remove the
goods without consent. Witness said
that he found that the defendant had
left town in August and took the
goods with him. They were after.
wards found at Clayton. Witness said
he had never given the defendant per.
mission to remove the goods. A
warrant was sworn out for arrest OF
Mr.. Hughes.
Constable Woodruff was sworn and
told of the arrest of defendant at
Clayton and how an attempt was
made to escape by Mr.. Hughes. Con-
stable Cresswell also told of the ar
rest. Witness was with Constable
Woodruff at time of arrest. He also
saw the attempt to escape.
Samuel Hall, the committing JUS
tice, said he went with officers to
Clayton and heard defendant say that
the goods in the house were those
bought of Mr.. Weaver.
Mr.. Elmer, counsel for defendant,
moved for the discharge of his client
on the ground that the testimony of
the State had not made out case
under section of the crimes act under
which the indictment had been found.
The Court denied the motion and
Mr.. Elmer proceeded TO put in the de-
fense's side of the case.
Before going on with the testimony
the Court ordered a special panel of
thirty names drawn from the box to
return at future date for the trial
of case of the State Board of Health
against @. F. Dare & Son. The panel
was then discharged for the term
with the exception of the twelve men
on the Geo. Hughes case.
Mr.. Elmer opened the defense by
putting the defendant on the stand,
who said he was in the junk business
and was in the habit of moving about.
That he had moved to Clayton, but
that he had told his parents to tell
Mr. Weaver where he had taken them.
Witness said he had never tried to
secrete them or to sell them. He had
paid Mr.. Weaver over $25 on the