The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1917-11-27
Another MansIaughter Case
and
Another AcQuittaI,


Another AcquittaI.
The killing of children by bein
run over by automobiles has beer
declared by two juries in this count,
to have been accidents, and all tina
remains of the two trials are the yer
diets of acquittal and whatever re
morse may be felt by the two mer
who snuffed out the lives of two in
nocent children.
On Wednesday Charles Coate was
placed on trial on the charge of man
slaughter in causing the death O
Carleton Wilkins, on the second O
October. The boy was going across
the road at Fostertown when the auto
mobile, driven by Coate, came along
and struck the little fellow, breaking
his leg in two places and crushing his
skull in fearful manner. The state
claimed that Coate was driving the
car at high rate of speed, but the
only witnesses on this point were
children who were unable to testify as
to the speed that was being maintain
ed by the car.
Young Wilkins was on his way home
from school and had alighted from the
auto bus which conveys pupils to and
from schools in Lumberton and Mount
Holly. Two other children had safely
crossed the road but Wilkins was
caught. The driver Of the bus said his
attention was called to the accident by
seeing some books flying in the air.
He had stopped his bus at a point
where he could see up and down the
road between Lumberton and Medford
and he did not see any auto coming
and did not know that there was one
in the neighborhood until the boy was
struck. He then called to the driver
of the auto who, after going some dis
lance, came back and picked the boy
up and took him to the hospital at
Mount Holly.
Cls IL L llChIb0 OOil Vi bl1C III
iuries which caused the boys death.
Mrs. Beebe, who lives at the Foster
town corner, said she saw the boy
struck. He was thrown against the
front of the car and carried some dis
lance before he dropped to the ground.
When he was reached it was found
that he was badly hurt and blood was
from his head. She said
she noticed the spot where the auto
hit the boy and also where it ran to
after the accident. She pointed out
those places to two members of the
jury and they took measure
ments. Mrs. Beebe could not tell how
fast the auto was going but that it was
going at good pace.
There were several children who
were on the scene and they told of the
accident, but some of them were en-
barrassed and were not able to give
testimony, with one or two
One little girl who had
come to meet hef sister said the auto
was going very fast and that Wilkins
seemed to run out from the bus right
across the road as the auto reached the
spot.
Counsel for defence put in strenuous
objections to the children testifying be-
,ause of their youth. One little girl,
however. showed her ability to testify
~ giving very correct answers to test
questions. Asked her age she answer
ID 13years old. Then she was asked how
ong she had been going to school and
he answered 40 years" This created |
quite laugh. The little girl stood |
,almly looking around until the
aughter ceased and then she con-
inued: II began going to school when
was four years DID," This stopped |
he laughter.
Joseph G. Kingdom was called to
estify to measurements. There was
Iuite struggle on the part of the de-
ence to keep this testimony out on
he ground that it was procured through |
second party. 1t was argued on one
ide that it was strictly hearsay testi-
nony, while the other. side claimed |
hat it was the same kind of evidence
hat would have been furnished any
me who would have made a map of
he scene. The testimony was finally
omitted. 1t was to the effect that
he automobile ran "a feet from the spot
where the boy was struck to where he
vas picked up, and that it was 321I
eet from that place to the point where
he automobile stopped.
This concluded the testimony for
Wednesday. On Thursday morning
Judge Lippincott said he had decided
hat the testimony above mentioned,
bout the measurements must be cut
'ut and that the jury must not take it
nto consideration at all.
The case then proceeded and Harry |
father of the dead boy, was
,ut on the stand. His testimony was
concerning the visit he
made to the Burlington county hos
,ital. He went to that place in a car
lriven by Charles Coate but it was not
he car that killed the boy. Mr.. Will
sins asked Coate why he had not given |
ome signal when he reached the cross
Dad and that Coate replied that his
horns were not working. This cor
oborated the statement of other wit |
lesses who said they did not hear any
lorn blown.
Albert Wilkins was also in the car
which carried Harry Wilkins to the
hospital. He heard Charles Coate say
hat his horns were not working on the
lay of the accident. and he SAID,
that the horn on the car he was then
driving would not work." Counsel for
lefense made a tremendous effort to
get this witness to say that Coate said
his bulb horn would not blow but the
witness would not make any such ad.
mission.
The defence was that the affair was
an accident and that Coate could not
be held accountable for it. 1t was ad-
mitted that the defendant knew the
bus was at the corner, that it carried
children to school but he did not know
that it unloaded its passengers there.
rhe bulb horn on the auto was blown,
but it was admitted that the klaxon
was out of order, also that the muffleI