Delaware gazette and state journal. (Wilmington, Del.) 1883-1902, 1902-10-02
ELLIOTT IS ACQUITTED.
The EVIDENCE Was Against Him-Aileged
Rioters Cleared 4Chadwicls Fined 5000. |

The Evidence Was Against Him. Alleged
Rioters Cleared 4Cnadwick Fined $780,.
Clarence A. Elliott was put on trial in
General Sessions Court yesterday week
on the charge Of sending Milk Inspector
Walter A.iMeErily a letter accusing him of
taking brlbes, the alleged purpose OF the
letter being TO exrort S14.s5 from NlcEvilly.
MIR. Elliott was represented by William Il.
Kurtz. 4iA
Milk Inspector McEvilly testified that he
received the letter May 23d, and had con-
versation with Elliott. in which Elliott said
he wrote the letter because he was hard UP
and hoped by soaring him he would rebate
the S14.s5 which Elliott had been fined for
not having his milk wagon properly marked.
Il told him he was up against the wrong
patty" said the milk inspector, after speak
ing of Elliott's conversation with him when
Elliott said he had hoped to scare McEviliy
by the talk of bribes. e4f fssssi
A second letter was also put in evidence,
Elliott speaking in an apologize way OF his
first letter. 5EEf3e
On cross-examination Mr.. McEyilly said
he knew Elliott had Just exchanged wagons,
and he gave him four days to put his name
on. Elliott was angry at being fined. After
receiving the first letter, Mr.. McEyilly had
talk with Mr.. Kurtz and said he was will
ing to accept an apology from Mr.. Elliott
The court would not permit details of the
conversation with the attorney to go into
~
The court. took judicial notice of the fact
that the letter alleged an offence that was a
inisdemeanor punishable with imprison-
inent.
For the defence Mr.. Kurtz declared that
he would show that there was no wrong
doing intended. The defendant testified that
he had been a milk dealer for two years;
1 thatafter he had traded wagons, the milk
4 inspector told him hu must have the new
one marked. He temporarily marked 1t
with lead pencil, yet he was later arrested
1 and fined.
| He SAID when he accused McEvilly Of
4 being bribed he meant that he had been
| paid to arrest him. @ VI
| The second letter was written as re,
| traction. W
4 Mr.. kurtz asked the court to charge the
| jury that II the iury beiie-ed that the letter
treatment. then it should find for the do
/ PENDANT. But the court said that was not the
| law, man being bound by what he wrote.
After addresses by Mr.. Kurtz and Mi.
Ward, the jury retired. About 10.S0 o'clock
| the jury came INFO court and Edward Mel
| choir, one of them, asked what the penalty
would be in case of a verdict of guilty,
! Chief Justice Lore told him that juror
had nothing to do with the penalty and was
I violating his oath when he attempted IL
consider such. Another juror, L. B. Joiles
| said the jurors appeared to be in doubt Al
10 WnSIner -Ine Gaze came unuBTs DlHCkfIlhil
and was informed that the statute coy rins
the Indictment did not refer to blaekmail
| At 10.55 the jury returned a verdict oil no
guilty.
ArouIrTAT. IN MoTIyG CASE.
In the case of Charles Bratron, Sainue
,Reason, Irwin King and William Tilghman
all colored, charged with rioting. yerdic
of not guilty. was returned, As to Thigh
man. the court had directed a verdict o
acquittal. There was another charge agains
Bratton, but the State dropped 1t, and al
four prisoners were discharged.
The cases growing out of the efforts Q
policy men to. bribe City Solicitor Rein
hardt came to an end. Martin H. Chadwick
and Harry Martin were indicted last wee
on charges of conspiring to engage in loi
terry policy writing and of offering a brib
of 500 to the city solicitor. On their al
! raignment, Martin pleaded guilty to tn
; conspiracy charge and was fined $500 an
, costs. Yesterday Chadwick pleaded guilt
of conspiracy and was fined 500 and costs
Heswas represented by ]. Frank Ball. Al
orney- General Ward dropped the briber
charges. al
There is feeling that Martin got off easy
On the application of Philip i. Garrett
| Hugh O. Browne was appointed commit
sioner to take testimony in the divorce cas
, of George Sharp, Jr., vs.. Lena Sharp, an
i on the application of Samuel S. Adams, Jr
j. Frank Ball wac appointed commissions
in the divorce case of Maggie II. Carter VI
: | .Toannh I'artar T~s7 = ---S IS