The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1902-02-04

duty of the grand jury and yet, from time to time
the Court has means of ascertainng that there is
Misrepresentation both in the minds of those who
are liable to do grand jury duty and also in the
minds of the people at large in regard to the re-
public.
The grand jury has an exceedingly simple, that
IS, easy and plain duty to perform. They are not
called upon to exercise any critical judgment to
the propriety of acts of the legislature of the
laws they ordained by the proper authorities
Their duty is entirely to deal with questions of
fact If given state of facts constitutes breach
Of the law, the duty of the grand jury is simply
decide in given case. has there been presented
before us proof which, if believed to be true con
sttutes state of facts such the law has declared
to be misdemeanor or crimel There the duty
| Now, there is misrepresentation on the part OF
the public upon one point, that is many persons
the public that any one who has grievance
whether 1t be of widespread or of a somewhat
narrower nature, has right to present evidence
| before the grand jury. No such right exists.
II you would analyze the oath and obligation
which are administered TO the grand jury you will
see that they are ito make presentment, and to
/ make diligent inquiry of those things that come
before them or that given them in charge"
And then there is another class of things namely,
| ing their present service" Now those are the
three ways in which grand jury can obtain juris-
diction; and none OF them include the right of a
person, not connected with the Court and the ad-
minlstration ofjustice to bring matters before the
| grand Jury.
Now those three ways are: First, thing comes
before the grand jury when the proper papers have
been filed with the Prosecutor and he having
them in hand, brings them to the attention OF the
grand jury by sending the witnesses before it The
prosecutor IS judicial officer, in one aspect as
much SO as the judge. So you will see in that case
| the proper channel.
Another way is where the Court gives matter
in charge to the grand jury that is where the
Court tells the grand jury that a certain class Of
crimes, or certain particular matter is to be in
CURED OF by them There they have Jurisdiction
/ 10 consider 1t because the Court has given it to
them in charge.
And third, where matter comes to their know
ledge, means where, in the course of one of these
other two channels of investigation the grand nrv
run npon an intercurrent crime which could not
OF apparently was not known to the authorities
iney are tnen authorized, of their own motion to
bring IN such an indictment is proper for that
intercurrent crime.
cause the Court wishes to give to you in charge
the duty of investigating the class of misdemeai-
ors which are perhaps best described in law by the
general term of "disorderiy houses The term is
not particularly apt one but it is an old one in
tne common law, and in plain English it means
tne investigation OF any person charged with the
habitua violation in certain place Of auv Dart of
the cr1minsl code of the state 1t makes no diff
ference how important how unimportant il Is
the class of crimes or rnsdemeo-o-s iiS a. 10
orderly houses" derive their importance NOT from
the individual acts that being done, nor the
quaiity OF Them but from the great gravity of such
an attack, in any community upon its existing in
situations, as is implied by anybody setting him
self up to be an habitual violator of its laws
feel quite sure that need not say to this GRAND
Jury that nothing could be more hostile to the Shirt
o. our government or to the good of the commun-
iy imam Tor any set of persons conspicuousfy to do
those things which mean that they think thew are
Tor some reason or other, beyond the law; and a
man who hao1tua1ly violates the law in any Mace
that he keeps for that purpose must be deemed 10
be considering that for some reason or other he
does not have to bend his knee to the law
Now, 1t is the duty of the grand jury without |
any exception, to bring every such case to the at
tent.on OF petit jury to look into its merits, |
whether the matter is the illicit sale of LIQUOR Or
whether ii is gambling on large or petty scale
mo matter what it is. The law has said 1--WE
propose to have citizens uniformly obey the acts
Oh tne legislature and If. in any locality, no |
matter where it Is, in this county evidence before
you convinces your minds that this, that or the
otner person IS doing those acts repeatedly which
constitutes violations of the law it is your clear
duty to find indictments against them. There can
be no exceptions.
There are two matters of law which the
prosecutor will explain to you, if you have auy
dlincuity about them, and which 1 may mention |
generally IN connection with this class of ocnses
One is that by certain statutes now in force in re-
gard to the unlawful sale, upon SUNDAY of infor;
Satng liquors It Is not necessary that there should
pc repeated violations. A single violation of the
lava clear violation of the law upon a sinoIe oc
casion, under our statutes now renders a man
properly indictabe. W
In regard to city, where licenses are got not I
from the Court but from the excise boards that
laes makes no diHerence whatsoever. This Court
ana THIS grand jury (which is part of this Courtl
do not lose their duty and their authority merely
because persons who are alleged to have violated
license to sell liquor from local hoard of a c;tv
no city can authorize its licensees to violate the
|
that that would be monstrous >
NOW, these remarks are made in the first place
70 tell you how these matters are to come before
you ano tney come before you in the highest way
from the Court and, in the next place to drag |
your attention to the Importance of thep-not be.
not because single sale of liquor is verv impor
tant matter; but because the position of citizen
=, violates the law is always vastly
grand jury Of this county will knowingly lend ts
influence to aid and abet
The appeal case of Alfred B. Davis VS..
Charles Robinson, was reported settled.
The appeal of the Burlington Gas Com.
pany VS.. the Burlington Sewage Com
pany, was added to the list.
The following were appointed commits
sioners to assess the benefits on the stone
road between Mount Holly and Smith
vile: jackson L. Nippins, A. Lincoln
Sailer, ]. Harvey Gaskill. For the road
from Mount Holly to Jacksonville the ap-
polntments were: Granville W. Leeds, DR..
G. W. Vanderveer, j ohm A. Hancock.
On Wednesday the court took up the
case of Susan Loid vs. The John S. Rogers
Company The plaintiff is the widow of
William Loid, of Pemberton, who at the
time OF his death, was working for the
Rogers Company at the new Asylum at
New Lisbon. derrick gave way and
threw Loid to the ground, causing his
death. 1t was discovered the derrick was
defective and Mrs. Loid claimed damages.
The jury rendered verdict of SO, 800 in
favor of Mrs. Loid. This is the second
time the case was tried, the jury disagree
ing in the first instance
The grand jury finished its labors on
Thursday and reported having found 81
bills. The prisoners in the jail were sent
for and were arraigned. They were as
follows:
Samuel Anderson, felouious assault on
Laura Cromwell, of New Hanover.
David w. Roberts had three indictments
to plead to- They were: For stealing 10
chickens from Montgomery Bishop; an
other for stealing 90 chickens from Mark
H. Buzby; and another for stealing 400
chickens from Albert Roberts. All the
parties live In Mount Laural township.
Samuel P. Dixon, breaking and enter
ing warehouse of Irving A. Collins, at
Moorestown, and stealing $50 worth of
paint.
Samuel Gray, breaking and entering
dwelling of John Eldredge, of Moores-
town, and stealing clothing valued at $44.
Lewis Lynch, atrocious assault and bat
terry on George W. Bothner. of Mount
Holly; also larceny of $3.50 from the
person of Bothner
Thomas Schauncey, outrageous assault
on Della SchaunceY, of Burlington.
Not one of the above had any idea of
being guilty and SO pleaded
There were only two in the entire lot
who pleaded guilty. One was Joseph A.
Hartman. who acknowledged the theft of |
gold watch from Springfield lady
The other fellow who pleaded guilty
was Bert Caldwell, of Bordentown. He
was charged with taking watch that was
the property Of William Dalzell, of Jobs
town. Caldwell made a statement to the
court in which he told of meeting Dalzell |
in Bordentown. They drank frequently |
and when Dalzell determined to go home
Caldwell went with him. On the way
Dalzell fumbled his watch and dropped it |