Oxford Democrat. [volume] (Paris, Me.) 1833-1933, 1914-03-17

| ty on an appealed case for lntoxication,
and on representation Of his counsel,
Mr.. Stearns, that he had taken medical
treatment for what was virtually ply.
steal inf1rmity, the case was on motion
Of County Attorney Dyer continued for
sentence, and be was allowed to 60.
Joseph Paradis Of Rumford retracted
bis plea on an appealed case for keeping
and depositing liquors. Mr.. Stearns ap-
peared In bis behalf. County Attorney
Dyer stated that the man was persist
emit violator Of the law. Judge King
impt sed sentence of fine of 500 and
costs of S18.S5, and sixty days in jail,
and sixty days additional u fine is not
paid.
County Attorney Dyer then moved for
sentence upon an indictment for nui-
sance found In 1908, to which Paradis
had pleaded guilty, and which had been
placed on file. Mr.. Stearns addressed
the court In Mr.. Paradis' behalf, and Mr..
Dyer replied quite vigorously. Judge
King imposed sentence of four months
in jail.
In the case of Anton Petratis OF Rum
ford, for single sale, the sentence of the
lower court was affirmed, and the fine Of
$50 and costs was paid.
Trial OF criminal cases was scheduled
to begin Friday morning, the first case
being against Daniel q. Trip OF Porter.
In this case an indictment was found
last October against Mr.. Trip for as
sault upon DR.. Edwin r. Chellis Of Por-
ter. The case was tried at that term, AL.
ton C. Wheeler being counsel for Mr..
Trip, and the result was disagreement
of the jury, which remained out for
some hours.
When the case was called Friday
morning, it appeared that Mr.. Trip had
no counsel, Mr.. Wheeler having with
drawn some time since. Judge King re-
quested Mr.. Wheeler to act for this trial.
Mr.. Wheeler then moved continuance
of the case until Saturday morning, say
ing that Mr.. Trip had no witnesses
here, but would be able to get them here
by Saturday morning. The continuance
was opposed by County Attorney Dyer,
but Judge King granted it, saying that
while the respondent had no legal claim
for it, he wished that there should be no
feeling that any man had not had full
opportunity for his defence.
The court then proceeded with the
trial of Harry Brandt, charged with as
sault with intent to kill and murder up
on the person of Jack Murray. County
Attorney Dyer conducted the case for
the state, and Brandt was defended by
NJ 81
was associated.
The assault occurred at camp Of the
Berlin Mills Co., where numbering op.
Grafton was being conducted, on Big
Brook, a tributary of the Magalloway,
In Township No. 5, Range 4, known as
Lynchtown. Jack Murray was foreman
of the crew, and Harry Brandt was at
work there.
1t was just before dinner on Jan. LIST,
1914, that the affair occurred, and the
scene was the cook room of the camp.
About the only conflict OF testimony was
as to the details of what occurred In the
few minutes Immediately preceding the
shooting.
Witnesses for the state were Jack Muir.
ray, an exceedingly we'll set up man and
evidently typical woods boss, Aaron
Brown, cook at the camp, and another
Jack Murray, workman, known as
"Black Jack" Murray. These three
were in the cook room with Brandt at
the time Of the affair. Their stories
were in substantial agreement. 1t SEEM
cd, by the way, that Murray and Brandt
had had little talk in the morning over
the question of whether Brandt was to
have his car fare paid, but it did not ap-
pear that that affected subsequent pro-
ceedings. What Brandt came into the
cook room, he asked the cook for some
thing to make bandages, saying that he
was afraid he had preached himself.
At that, according to the states wit
nesses, Murray jokingly told the cook to
ask Brandt whether he preached himself
shivering.
This started an alteration between
the two men, and they "chewed the rag"
for while, when Murray asked Brandt
il he was looking for trouble. He re-
piled by applying an unprintable epithet
to Murray, whereupon Murray went up to
him, and slapped his face with the fiat
of his hand, at the same time pushing
Brandt back against the table. The 9th
or two men then stepped in and pulled
Murray back.
Brandt Immediately went out through
the dingle into the bunk room, got his
revolver from his kit, came back to the
door of the cook room, opened 1t and
fired shot from the revolver. The bull
let went through the sleeves of Murray's
shirts near the shoulder, cutting through
the skin and making scratch some two
inches long on the outside of the arm.
Murray went into the office and had
the wound dressed, and Brandt went
back to the bunk room, came to the
dinner, and then took his kit and started
down the tote road. The next day he
was arrested near Bemis by Deputy
Sheriff Landry, who had been notified
by telephone.
Brandt's story Of the preliminaries was
somewhat different. According to this
Murray's manner was insulting and ag-
gravatiug from the first, and 1t was
Murray and not Brandt who used the
unprintable epithet. Furthermore he
said that Murray struck him four or five
timee, and after the other men bad separ-
ated them, threatened to get club and
kill Brandt. Brandt said that he came
from New Jersey in the fall, and had
never been in the logging woods before.
He was 40 years old. He made good
appearance as witness, and seemed to
be very candid, so candid, In fact, that
he damaged his case by some Of his ad.
missions. He said that he did not In
tend to shoot Murray when he pointed
the revolver, but his finger must have
pressed the trigger.
Besides Brandt, only one other witness
was put on by the defence, a woodsman
who has worked under Murray since the
first of January. His testimony was in
line with the endeavor Of the defence to
show that Jack Murray was bully with
his crew, but they were able to get In
but little admissible. testimony on this
point.
Judge King in charging the jury gave
them the forms of four verdicts which
were possible under the Indictment:
Guilty of assault with intent to kill and
murder; guilty of assault with intent to
iii oplv. Uuiltv NJ asaault and hakterv