Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1913-06-17
MAUSERT JURY IS
GUT, AF TER BRIEF
CHARGE BY JUDGE
Court Defines DisorderIy House
Keeping and How Guilt
Is Determined.
ASKS WHETHER ACCUSED
COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN
Says Accused Hotel Broad Pro-
prietor Is Entitled to Ben
eft of Doubt.

lie jury III NluHIicl OS0otOAS tAAe~S
for fve days last week heard testi-
mony in the trial of George E. Maui
sert, proprietor of the Hotel Broad,
charged with maintaining disor-
derby house at his hotel, and yester-
day listened to the summing up by
Frank E. Bradner, counsel for Mau-
sert, and Prosecutor Louis Hood for
the State, today received the charge
and final instructions from Judge
Harry V. Osborne and at 1912 retired
to deliberate on its verdict.
Judge Osborne consumed just Il
minutes in the delivery of his charge.
1t was regarded as absolutely fair 10
both sides. "A fair. impartial charge,
was the opinion given by both Prose-
cutor Hood and Mr.. Bradner at It's
conclusion.
Four hours after the jury had gone
out they asked the court for further
Instructions as to the responsibilities
of a hotel proprietor. Judge osborne
asked them If they meant the hotei
proprietor in question. The foreman
replied in the negative, asserting II
was about "a" proprietor he wished
to know.
After the court had defined the re-
sponsibilities of hotel proprietor
they went back to further consioera-
ton.
Judge Osborne started his charge
by reading portions Of the indlct-
ment against Mausert and stated
that it was drawn in the form pro-
vided for by the statute, and then
nroceeded to tell what constituted
disorderly house. ANY place of pub
lie resort said Judge Osborne, IN
which illegal practices are carried on
Is a. disorderly house. The gather
ing of idlers, persons of ill-repute,
male or female. is public nuisance
and therefore the place of gathering
Is a disorderly house.
what sufices to Constitute Crime
mo one can legally carry on
place or business of this KIND. The
offense of keeping a disorderly house
s does not consist of the keepers COM
uniting tlaer-erime- themselves, but by
nermitting the crime to be COM
nitted. 1t ia sufficient for the law
II the keepers suffer 1t to go on
The question of personal control OF
and the permission for the illegal
acts to go on is a question for the
fury to decide"
! .If YOU are satisfied continued the
Judge. that the defendant had the
power to control the illegal relations
existing in his hotel you should con-
vict. Is il reasonable to suppose that
such actions could take place without
his knowledge? The rumors as to the
kind of house he was running had
been called to Mausert's attention"
Judge Osborne here referred to the
testimony of Acting Chief of Police
Michael ]. Ryan, who had testified
that about two years ago he had an
interview with Mausert, in which he
told him that he had heard rumors
that his hotel was being conducted in
disorderly manner, and to the testi-
mony of Fritz Storsberg. who, as a
witness for Mausert. on cross-exami-
nation. admitted he had heard the
same rumors and had spoken to Maui
sert about them.
as there a reasonable doubt in
your mind that the defendant knew
the character of his house?' asked
judge Osborne. He then referred to
the varied testimony produced by the
State. calling attention to the stories
told by the Rev. DR. Edwin 1. Stearns
and others of the Anti-Saloon League.
by the paid detectives who gathered
the evidence and their women COM
panions. by the two men and one girl
arrested at the time of the raid and
of the county detectives who aided
In the raid.
He discussed the Rev Dr. Stearnss
testimony of debauchery and revelry
in the hotel on last New Years eve,
= 4. a.. Il.
by Pla;nclothesman Thomas Smith,
Of the First precinct who testified
that he had seen women he knew to
be women of the street frequently
enter the hotel in the company of
male companions.
Taking up the testimony of the
paid detectives he called attention to
The fact that they gained access to
the hotel with female companions,
despite the fact they had no baggage
with them.
NO Law Concerning baggage.
sThere is no law compelling hotel
keeper to compel an applicant for
rooms to have baggage" said Judge
Osborne, but the entire absence of
It should be enough to occasion sus-
picion of the applicants for rooms"
He then spoke strongly Of the fact
that the six paid detectives had all
testified that they entered the hotel
and were assigned rooms frequently
for themselves and female compan-
ions without having any baggage with
them.
Continuing, Judge Osborne said to
the jurymen, you. as individuals,
may not approve of the obtaining of
Evidence in this way, but only in the
event that you do not believe the
men obtaining it can you find the de-
fendant not guilty. This testimony is
corroborated by the testimony of the
women and girls and also by the ho-
sel register.
I'm one instance you have the testi-
mdny that a girl was called on the !
telephone from a place outside the
hotel by an employee of Mausert and
at the hotel introduced to one of the
detectives who then took her to a
room. AS for the persons arrested in
the hotel on the night of the raid.
their object in being there is too
obvious to need detailing to you now.
hnolr and roUicfar nf fba