Gilpin observer., 1906-06-28
AEIGHBoRHooD QUARREL.
Mountain City Residents Get all That's Com.
ing 10 Them in Court.

L >NSoOo "a
Richards, People vs. Mrs. Marguerite
Hicks, People vs.. Elmer Richards, which
were brought before Judge Ashbaugh
Two weeks ago, were combined Monday
and came up for trial. Monday and Tues.
day, and part Of Tuesday evening we're
consumed in the trial and the differences
which have existed among the Hicks,
Richards and Terrells the past several
moons, were given an airing from the
first to the last chapter in a story of a
neighborhood quarrel that was interest.
ing, sensational and spicey from start to
finish According to the testimony OF
the defendants in the eyes of the com.
planning witnesses they were everything
that was bad and the vocabulary Of pro-
family was inadequate to lend proper
emphasis to the epithets that we're
hurled at them. Indeed, they were &C.
costed with the vile name OF "bull dog"
something to one OF the comely defend.
ants was about the worst ever. The COM
planning witnesses IN their testimony led
the jurors and spectators to believe that
while the defendants regarded them as
being everything that was bad, said de.
PENDANTS could go some themselves when
it would become necessary to resort to
vulgarity, the language used being such
that it would fairly scorch the scenery
in the vicinity of Mountain City. Tues
day afternoon the taking of testimony
and cross, examination was completed
and four legal giants, Smith and With
row for the state and Hicks and Williams
for the defense, commenced their argu-
ments to the Jury.
Smith and Withrow, of course, endeav-
ored to convince the jury that all blame
for the Mountain City war dance should
rest on the shoulders of the defendants
they were the aggressors and should
be dealt with accordingly, and that fact
should be borne in mind when the jury
would be trying to reach verdict.
When Hicks and Williams got their
turn at the twelve tried and true,"
their plea was along different lines.
Counsel for defendants tried to impress
upon the jury that the atmosphere in
the vicinity of the Hicks residence
would be smilingly placid were it not for
eTs, ->"hlesome Terrells, quiet would
reign supreme, their clients would be the
personification of goodness, and were
the complaining witnesses far removed
from the neighborhood, scriptural advice
could be needed and they would "love
thy neighbor as thyself."
A little after four o'clock the case
went to the jury. They deliberated until
the supper hour and it was not until
they had partaken Of hearty meal that
they could reach verdict, the decision
doubtless, being actuated by full stom-
ach. They acquitted Mrs. Hicks and
Elmer Richards of the charge of raising
disturbance and found Fred Richards
guilty. The verdict of the jury was sup
plemented by the following:
I'VE, the jury, wish to state that while
we found Fred Richards guilty on the
second count as filed in the information,
it is our unanimous opinion that all the
Paisioo SouSSiHcu III tuiS Cdst unerlt tne
severest censure of the court for their
conduct"
Judge Ashbaugh, acting on the
recommendation of the jury, proceeded
to give the defendants and the complain
ing witnesses scathing rebuke, which
he thinks will be the means of retaining
peace in the Mountain City neighbor.
hood for month or two at least. He as
sured all concerned in the case that il
they were ever brought before him again
on the charge of making disturbance
he would impose the severest penalty
possible. Fred Richards, who was found
guilty by the jury was fined $1,000 and
costs, which will amount in all to about
5000.