The aegis & intelligencer. [volume] (Bel Air, Md.) 1864-1923, 1903-10-16

| verdict IN this case by one of the Judges WI
| presided at the trial, and the SubScuucntly
| published card of certain of the Jurors con
| strained, in justice to ourselves, to make the
| following statement:
| OUR DUTY.
| sworn to well and truly try the prisoner &C.
| cordInE to the testimony of crcditablc wit
| ncsseS given under oath at the trial. and not
upon unsworn statements of persons outside
the court room.
And As undcrst God the case it was in
| cumhcnt upon the State i'll order to Sustain
| the charge against Mrs. Neman, to prove
beyond 1t reasonable doubt, not only that
| uiSsoiute women were at her house, but that
| they were there, plying their trade uf bawdrN
| with her knowledge and consent.
THE EVIDENCE.
| With the exception oftwo or three witnesses,
| who, with no knowledge of the fact them
| selves testified that they had heard for some
| time past that disSolute women had been at
| Mrs Nci man's house, but could not say from
| whom they heard it, where they heard it, or
| when they heard it, or whether they even be
| licNcd it or not. the only other witnesses pro-
| duced by the State were three disrcput;tblc
| women from Baltimore City and three gentle
| men from Hartford county.
The testimony of two OF these women was
| that they were brought to Bel Air from Balti-
more, in August last, during he County Fair
| by one OF Mrs. Neiman'S employees, ard
manned two days at her house, and there piled
their trade. But they admitted in the course
of their examination that they spent all day
Thursday on the Fair Grounds, and only saw
Mrs. Neiman at meal time until Friday after
noon, whcn,she,ordered them out other house;
that one OF them had formerly lived in the
ncighborhood of Bel Air, and the other was
there during the Soldiers Encampmcnt in
July. but neither had ever been at Mrs. Nei-
man S before; and that they were both paid
to testify. The third woman, at whose
house in Baltimore the other two lived, tcsti-
fed that these girls were not brought to Bel
Air by Mrs. Nciman's employee or by any one
else, but came OF their own accord, solely to
see the County Fair. having planned the trip
among themselves some ten days before; al d
that she herself had been offered fifty dolla:
by Il man from Bel Air to testify against Mrs.
Neiinan after she had told him that she knew
nothing that could be of any advantage to the
States case.
The testimony OF these women, admitted
diSrcputablc characters, and contradcting
one another as they did, in JUDI
mCnt unworthy of belief.
And the evidence OF the three gentlemen
w;ts-that they were at Mrs. Ncinan'S for
IA few minutes on Wednesday evening or
Thursday evening of the Fair; that they saw
some girls there in the parlor, one OF them
smoked Il cigarette and another sat down
in mans lap, but Mrs Nemuu was not in
the parlor. and nothing was either said or
done that led them to believe the women
were prostitutes, though they thought they
were Il little free; one OF the witnesses stating
that he thought they were the girls who were
performing al the Fair Grounds in front of
the Grand Stand and were boarding at Mrs.
Nciman'S.
The defendant then to meet this testimony,
proved by seven or eight witnesses, men OF
family, her immediate neighbors, that, with
the exception of these women who were there
for two days during the Fair, they had never
known any woman to stop at Mrs. Neiman's
during the entire time she has lived in Bel Air
and they did not believe it possible that
women could have been there without their
knowing 1t, as they were all accustomed to
they had never seen or heard any disorder
there, nor had they their families ever been
disturbed. And further proved by number
witnesses. whom hoard
ed at the house. and others visited there fire.
quently to play pool. or get Il glass of am
brosia, that they had never seen any disorder
or even heard OF any women stopping there,
except on the one occasion during the Fair, |
and II any such thing had been going on they
would certainly have observed it.
And also proved by five six witnesses,
who were at her fruuse during the evenings
%! the Fair, that they saw these girls there i'll
singing. and appeared to be enjoying them
selves, but they saw nothing improper in |
their conduct nor ANYTHING to indicate that
they were disreputable women.
And Mrs. Neiman herself testified that her |
husband, who was formerly in the telephone |
business, purchased half interest in the |
hotel business where she and her family now
live in Bel Air, about year and Il half ago |
and they then moved from York, Pa, where |
which she still owns; that shortly after they |
came to Bel Air her husband died, and she |
has since then, with the assistance other SON |
in-law, cndeavored to manage the business |
herself in an honest and decent way; that be- |
sides taking dodgers and furnishing; regular |
board, she has conducted restaurant, and |
sold ambrosia, being advised it was la wful to |
do so, along with ginger ale and Sarsaparilla |
that she has been successful with her rcStau-
rant, and has had as many eighteen and |
nineteen regular boardtrS for five or six |
weeks at time; that she never had any |
women boardcrs prior to the County Fair in |
August, nor had any women ever visited there |
with the exception of her son in-law 5 mot Their. |
who paid little visit shortly after her sons |
marriage; that on Wednesday afternoon Of |
the Fair, three young ladies applied to her !
for board. and in reply to questions from her |
stated they were from Baltimore, and had |
come up Ior the Fair, and expected to return |
Thursday evening, one of them said she
had relatives i'll the ncighborhood but |
the other two were not acquainted about
here. though one of them said she mad spent
a day here during the soldiers Encampncnt;
they appeared to be well behaved. and she
SAW nothing unusual about them, and |
agreed to accommodate them il they would |
all occupy one room, as her house was very
them to their room, she did not them
again that evening, as her time was very much
occupied with household duties. having but
one servant, "a cook to help her with the
work; the next time she them for
lit while at supper on Thursday evening
after the Fair. when they told her they had
concluded to remain over Friday, and she did
not them again that evening as she was
greatly tatigued and retired shortly after she
got through with her work; that it was not
until Friday afternoon, when she accidently
overheard conversation of these girls among
themselves, that she had the slightest Sus-
piCion that they were not respectable " omen, |
but she did not even then dream that they
were Such disrcpytablc characters as they have
since proved themselves to be; thai soon
as she realized they were not such persons as |
she cared to have about her house, she order
ed them out; they left at once, but missing the
last train for Baltimore, returned about eight
O'Clock. and were allowed to remain till next
morning. only because the other hotels in the
town were fall. and on condition they would
go at once to their rooms and lined there;
took |
Baltimore, and she never saw or heard of
taem afterwards till this case WAS brought
into court; that she had nothing to do with
thicr coming to Bel Air in any way. and knew
nothing of any improper conduct on their
part while ut her house: and she is satisfied
her employee had nothing whatever to do
with their presence at her house, and does not
believe lie would have been guilty ofany such
outrageous conduct towards her.
OUR VERDICT FOUNDED ON THE EVIDENCE.
And it was on the testimony given at the
trial. and on it alone that we founded our
verdict.
hands on Monday afternoon VIC had reached
the conclusion, from all the evidence submit
ted to us, that the State had failed to prove
the prisoner guilty of the charge. and there
fore voted for acquittal, and knowing of no
reason for altering the opinion had thus
formed. continued to vote for acquittal until |
4 verdict was reached.
The other six Jurors on the contrary voted
for conviction. and on Tuesday morning,
thesCourt, and his Honor. Judge Waters,
who was then presiding alone sent for the jury
and stated to them in open court: That he |
was not willing to discharge us at that time;
that much time and money had been cx-
pended in the trial of the case, it was our
duty to agree, and while it but natural |
land i'll most cases usuaD that different |
opinions existed among he individual Jurors. |
we should try and reconcile differences |
and arrive at verdict, that were the |
Judge both of the law and the facts. and if |
we of the opinion that the State |
had failed to make out case of |
guilt against the prisoner then il was |
our duty to acquit; but if on the other |
hand. we believed the guilt of the accused |
had been proven then it was our duty to con- |
vict; and that were not to be influenced |
by anything that may have been said out |
side the Court ROOM nor by any argument !
of counsel not based on the evidence. Some |
hours later. after further consideration, the |
jury again notified his Honor that ticy were |
unable to agree. but received reply from |
him. And shortly thereafter some of the six |
jurors who had previously voted for Couvic- |
ton stated that they believed there was a |
reasonable doubt of guilt, and willing |
to vote for acquittal. and in Il short time then |
the verdict was reached.
While we refrain from using such intcnlper |
ate language as his Honor employed from |
the bench on the termination of trial it is |
nevertheless Just asincomprehersiblet &c ushow |
his Honor could, from the evidence in the |
case, have come honestly to a conclusion that |
the state had proved the Charge beyond a