The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1915-11-02

lie found them. Muir explained his ple'
n OF guilty because he said there was nj
E. doubt about his taking them away bu
It he insisted he did not steal them. TIL
d contractor was not in court to give testi
IL mony and despite the statement of thu
e defendant and his brother-in-law, Muh
i was placed in charge of the probation
i officer for three years with directions t.
o pay the costs, There was an expression
i by several who heard this case that the
4 matter should never have reached ths
e grand jury.
Frank Wishniski was called for sen
e tence for assault with intent to Kill
! Joseph Salcoski. The offence occurred
| at Parry. The defendant took revol-
e1 verso it was alleged, and the prosecu-
: tor referred to it as ''32 calibre," but
J admitted it had never been found-and
+ laid in wait for the man he shot, The
wound was scalp wound. Robert Pea
cock and Judge Homer appeared for the
: defendant The latter said he thought
) the man should be sent to the Railway
reformatory because if he was sent to
the county jail-and Judge Horner said
he did not think that lenient sentence
should be pronounced he would be a
county charge and expense and when
released would not be any better than
when he went in. The same thing
would occur if the man were sent to the
state prison. He cannot read or write.
If sent to the reformatory he would be
given instruction and would learn some
trade. 1t was shown that the man was
melted to commit the deed by Salcoski's
wife, who seemed to be infatuated with
him. Judge Horner thought the woman
should have been indicted for completely
and in reply to some of the Judges re-
marks the prosecutor stated that that
part of the case had been considered by
the jury but that Wishniski had not
been called as witness.
Prosecutor Kelsey was very deter
mined that the man should go to the
state prison. That was the only proper
place for him. He said that while the
defendant might be ignorant of our laws
and customs he knew enough to distin-
guish between right and wrong and that
he ought to feel very thankful that he
was not facing an indictment for murder
in the first degree.
Judge Lippincott said there was some
thing in the mans appearance that
caused him much trouble and he was
not clear that disposition should be
made Of the case. Hewanted the mans
mental condition looked into and re-
turned the defendant to Jail for that pur-
pose.
When Peter Dolan was called for
sentence, William A. Slaughter object
ed to action on the ground that Dolan had
been put in jeopardy twice for the same
offence. Dolan was first called up on
charge of receiving stolen goods and the
court allowed the waiver of indictment
to be set aside on the ground that the
charge was not sufficiently clear and the
case ought to go before the grand jury.
That body, on the same evidence that
was to be used in the other case. in
dicted Dolan for larceny. MIR. Slaughter
argued that the two charges were identi-
cally the same. The case was laid over
that briefs might be prepared.
On Friday the application of Law
renee Kerwin to keep hotel at Centre
ton, was heard. William d. Miller ap-
peared for the applicant and former
Senator Boyd Avis represented the re-
monstrants. He began his case by call |
ing the signers and showed that not one
of them ever knew or had heard of |
Kerwin until he presented his appli-
cation for them to sign. They had as
serted in the application that he was a |
man of sobriety and honesty, but they
did not have any knowledge of him
whatever. The application also con-
tanned the usual statement that there
were certain number of furnished |
rooms in the house and some of the
signers said they did not know anything
about that. After getting through with
that line Seantor Avis took up the ques-
ton of necessity for the hotel and
showed that no such reason appeared.
For the applicant Mr.. Miller produced
witnesses who testified that since the
road from Masonyille to Rancocas has
been improved travel had increased very
materially, that parties of fishermen
and gunners came to Centreton and
we're not able to be accommodated. Mr..
Kerwin testified that he did not expect
to make fortune at the place. The
hotel is very much out of repair and he
would have to spend some money to
place it in good shape. He wanted to
make it attractive so that people would
seek it as boarding place and house
at which they could rest
Mr.. Miller contended that this hotel
had, until within about year ago, been
licensed for nearly a half century and
that there was really no need to show
that it is necessity, the fact of it being
privileged SO long was evidence that it
was needed to accommodate travellers
and those who wanted to stop and get a
drink.
The case consumed the entire day and
at It's close Judge Lippincott said that |,
the applicant had impressed him as a
straightforward man and there did not
seem to be any question about his fitness
to conduct hotel, but that question
was not before the court. 1t had been |
said that, owing to the license having
been refused and the place being I'M
occupied, the value of the property had |
been reduced, but the legislature had not
contemplated that the court should grant |
licenses merely to keep values up. The
duty imposed upon the court in
license cases was one of gravity and re-
sponsibility and the subject was one that |
was always approached with careful de
liberation and the widest latitude was
given in taking testimony in order that |
all the facts might be brought out The |
only question in this case was whether,
under the statute, the hotel in question
is necessity. This hotel has been closed
for long time. There had not been
any testimony introduced to show that
it is necessary to have it opened again
for the use of those who wish to hold
public meetings or gatherings in which
the township is interested. In this case
the court considered the application
proposition for an entirely new place,