The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1910-12-13
Court.


Court.
Late on Tuesday afternoon the case OF
the state against Joseph P. Fem and
William r. Gilpin, who formerly on
Quoted livery business at Burlington,
was given to the jury. The trial resulted
from an indictment charging the defen.
dants with obtaining $500 from the Union
National Bank, of Mount Holly, on q
false statement of their liabilities. The
jury was out about twenty-four hours
During that time they returned to court
for instructions, but being unable to agree
on verdict they were discharged on
Wednesday afternoon. A majority of the
iurymen favored the acquital of both de-
PENDANTS, while the others wanted to con-
vict Fem and render a verdict of not
guilty In favor of Gilpin. The case will
not be retired for some time to come.
Prosecutor Atkinson announced that the
indictment charging Fem with having
forged the name of Philip N. Haines, of
Jacksonville, to note for $500 would not
be tried at the present term of court, and
the jurYmen for the September term of
court were discharged.
Everard Horner, of Bridgeboro, indict-
ed on a charge of desertion preferred by
his wife, was placed on trial Wednesday
morning. The defendant was represented
by George M. Hillman.
Mrs. HOrner was called as the first wit
ness. She was married on September l.,
1909, and at time when her husband was
not making enough money to maintain q
home and she had to work She received
nothing from her husband and had him
arrested at Riverside. Her condition will
not permit her to work now, and she de-
ponds upon two friends at Bridgeboro.
After the grand jury had indicted Horner.
he sent his wife letter and offered his
wife home at his boarding house In
Bridgeboro, which was kept by a man.
She refused this and another similar offer
on the ground of unpleasant conditions
and the fact that she did not consider the
offer bona fide. Alter considering that
she had been deserted nothing came of an
offer made by Horner to pay her So per
week. Witness declared that she would
not live with her husband. She had heard
numerous reports about him, and objected
to the questionable manner In which he
was running around in Philadelphia. Mrs
Horner said her husband had frequently
threatened her. At one time he threw her
to the floor.
George ConoYer, who saw Mrs. Horner
thing about this assault, but he was not
permitted to testify.
Mrs. Elwood Lloyd, In whose property
the contending parties once kept house,
denied ever doing anything with the OBJ
ject of causing trouble between the
couple, but she did say that she would
rather do without proper provision for
herself than see Mrs. Horner return to her
husband after she had been abused and
neglected to surprising extent.
In opening the case for the defence, Mr..
Hillman stated that there would be an
absolute denial of the charge of desertion;
that Horner stood ready to take his wife,
provide home for her and give her proper
support. He left her because she request
ed him to do so.
Horner took the stand and said his wife
did not give proper attention to her house
hold duties; was out with the Lloyds every
night about half of each week, her social
duties interfering with the preparation of
meals. He frequently went home and
found an empty house. She hated the
sight of him, and said If he left her she
would not ask any support from him. The
witness has steady work and is willing for
his wife to return.
During the cross-examiD alton Horner
denied making questionable visits to
Philadelphia. When they separated there
was friendly understanding that neither
was to have any claim upon the other.
They met one time after parting, and
hearing his wife's fatigue story he gave
her $40.
Mrs. Pippitt, who formerly lived at
Bridgeboro, had seen the Lloyds take Mrs.
Horner out at nights three or four times a
ho hod hoard Mra H0ruo- go,
that she would be better off without her
husband.
The defendant was given good charac-
ter by Freebooter Walter Denning.
Walter E. Newkirk, who keeps a store
at Bridgeboro, said Horner had made ar
rangements for his wife to board with
him, that being after the separation. The
witness had also arranged for Mrs. Horner
to deal at his store and Horner was to be
responsible for the debts thus contracted.
Edward Lloyd. who was present at the
time, did not see Horner act improperly
when both men were In questionable re-
sort In Philadelphia during the period of
separation.
1t was shown by another witness that
Horner visited questionable resort in the
city last month.
The jury found Horner guilty. Sem
tence was suspended until December 81.
He was ordered by the court to pay his
wife $25 at once and So per week. Six
months time was given him in which to
pay the costs.
Indictments for the Illegal sale OF liquor
were taken up Wednesday afternoon, the
defendants being Solomon Tietlerman and
John Ewing. of Camden. who are alleged
to have made sales at Palmyra The evil
dence in this case was secured by Consta
BILE j. ]. Tones, of Palmyra, who reported
the matter to Prosecutor Atkinson. The
defendant was represented by Kramer and
Stackhouse.
at the end Of the states case, on motor