The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1914-10-20
Alfred w. Lofland's Record.

seemed to deem it necessary to apologis
8 for the quick temper of Alfred w. 10
q land, which it characterized as one {
his weak spots" Truer words wer
never spoken. That quick temper is
+ very weak spot in the makeup of tn
J Democratic candidate for sheriff and ha
more than once placed him on the cour
! records of this county. The Herald Oh
Friday, said: $50 much has been salt
and written about Alfred w. Lofiand'
court record. there has been so mucl
Justification and exaggeration about i
that we think the public should know
the truth, just as it came out before the
court, and we were present at the tim'
Mr.. Lofiand came into the court anC
told his story" Then the story goes or
to tell that there was man at public
sale where Lofiand was auctioneer, there
was dispute about bid, the colored
man called Lofiand some vile names and
the Democratic candidate for Sheriff
lstruck the man blow which was not
serious and left no mark. The item says
there was no brutality or atrocity about
lit, 'Jatst resentment at being subjected to
insulting language by man a0ho ne re-
gdrded as his inferior"
Here is something to think abou t.
Because a poor colored man was con-
sidered by AL. Lofland as his inferior ii
was all right for the candidate for Sheriff
TO hit him, mot a serious blow" but a
little tap to show the colored man his
inferiority. The statement proceeds
with the information that Judge Gaskill
administered a lecture and imposed a
fine. This is only one of other cases and
is not that which we have particularly
in mind as that occurred in Judge
Horners term. 1t was colored man
who was assaulted then, and it was at
public sale where Lofiand was auctioneer
that the assault occurred. In fact the
records seem to show that Lofiand had
trouble at more than one sale where he
was auctioneer and where he allowed
that 'quick temper" to get away with
him. The case to which we now refer
occurred about five years ago. The
facts as we recall them were that
colored man was in a stall and was ask
ed by the auctioneer what he wanted
there. The colored man replied that he
wanted to bid on some pigs. Probably
with the idea that the bidder was
much inferior person than himself the
auctioneer had some words with him
and assaulted him. A nice man to have
in the high Office of Sheriff. The state
ment that the colored man who was as
saulted fused vile and insulting Ian
guage to one who regarded him (the
colored mani as his Inferior" is quite
rich when the rough ways and language
of AL. Lofiand are remembered by many
who are intimately acquainted with him.
But let's look at the record on file in
the office of the county clerk. Here it is:
State
VS..
Alfred W. Lofland.
Indictment February "a, 1904.
Assault and battery on Adam Oft, Jr.
Plea non vult. Sentence $40 fine.
State
VS..
Alfred w. Lofiand.
Indictment November Is, 1904.
Assault on Albert Weston.
Pleaded not guilty, retracted and was
fined $50.
State
VS..
Alfred w. Lofiand, Wallace l.. Brock.
Indictment December IL, 1905.
Obstruction of process being served by
Sheriff John j. Norcross.
State
VS..
Alfred w. Lofland, Wallace l.. Brock.
Indictment December IL, 1905.
Conspiracy.
Sheriff John j. NOrcrOss.
State
Alfred w. Lofland, Wallace L. Brock.
Indictment December II, 1905.
Larceny.
Sheriff John j. NorcrOss.
The last three indictments will be
commented on further down.
State
VS..
Alfred w. Lofiand.
Indictment January %, 1910.
Assault. Albert l. Muse.
Plea guilty. Fined $50.
In this last case if our recollection
serves right, Lofiand was cautioned that
it might be state prison for him if he
came before the court again on similar
charge.
On the three indictments in which
Sheriff Norcross was the complainant
the cases were about as follows: There
was to be sale at Florence, and LOT
land was the auctioneer. Sheriff Nor
cross had levied on the goods advertised
to be sold and had deputized constable
Anderson Shinn to go to the sale and
caution prospective buyers that they
could not get the goods they purchased.
Lofland set himself up as higher than
the Sheriff and assured the people who
were there to bid, that they could go
right ahead and they would get all they
bought. For this She action was
brought before the grand jury and Lof-
land was indicted for obstructing the
legal acts of the sheriff, the very office
he now seeks and which he would have
to protect against just such proceedings
as he was guilty of committing.
at is true that at times he has allowed
his temper to get the better of his good
judgment, but he always regrets his
hasty actions and does all in his power
to make restitution" So that is admit
ted, but nothing is said of the fact that
it has required the grand jury to aid
him in regretting, and that the restitu-
ton has been in the shape OF fines paid
into the county treasury, with the ex-
ception of the Norcross cases, which ap-
pear to have been settled without the
necessity of being hauled before the
court and fined.
This is the man the people of Burling-
ton county are asked to put into the
Office of sheriff, man whose record on
the books of the court is like that of
other lawbreakers, one who has been
lucky enough to get off by paying a fine
for crimes which have landed less for
tunate fellows in the state prison. Is il
desirable to have a man in a position
where he is likely to ''allow his temper
to get the better of his good judgment, y
even if he does regret it later? What
protection would that he to any one hav.
L