The Mount Holly news. [volume] (Mount Holly, Burlington Co., N.J.) 1891-1942, 1919-05-20
Court Proceedings

On Wednesday the case of Lindsa
against the city of Burlington, wa
given to the jury about noon, and a re
turn was not made until Thursda,
: morning when the jury announce,
their inability to agree and they wer
discharged. The result was what wa
predicted by many who heard tn
case. The Judge SO often expressed
his inability to reach a conclusion tina
it is not TO be wondered at that lively,
men not as well versed in the law al
the Judge was could be expected t.
settle the matter.
In Judge Wells court, Thursday
after disposing of some orphans court
matters, the case of the state against
Theresa Reeves was heard. The wo.
man had pleaded guilty to assault and
battery on Mrs. Florence Siimm, but
there seemed to be such difference OF
opinion between the lawyers in the
case that the Judge determined to hear
evidence.
Mrs. Slimm was called and told OF
the occurrence which happened on the
14th of April. She was at the house of
/, her next door neighbor-Mr. Sturgis-
who was moving and Mrs. Slimm had
! gone in to render whatever assistance
she could. While there Mrs. Reeves
came rushing into the house and order
ed Mrs. Slimm to get off the premises.
The house is owned by Mrs. Reeves or
her husband. In giving the order Mrs.
Reeves used rake to emphasize Der
meaning and brought the rake down
on Mrs. Slfmm's shoulder with such
which came near breaking the skin.
At the time she made the assault Mrs.
Reeves applied a vile name to Mrs.
Slimm.
Elwood Sturgis, at whose house the
assault occurred, said he saw Mrs.
Reeves strike Mrs. Slimm with rake
handle and heard her apply vile
name to the complainant. Mrs. Slimm
folded her arms and did not say any
thing to Mrs. Reeves. An attempt
was made to show that Mrs. Reeves
had a right on the property to give
any order that she might choose to as
Sturgis had given the house up but he
said he had not done so. His month
was not up until the Both of April, but
he had told Mrs. Reeves he was going
to move on the 14th.
Walter Greenwood, who was helping
load Sturgis' goods, told of seeing the
assault. When the witness first saw
Mrs. Reeves she was ain field across
the street with rake in her hand. On
cross-examination Greenwood denied
having said, in Berry's hotel, that
Mrs. Slimm struck the first blow.
Amos Greenwood, another helper,
corroborated this testimony.
Charles Crispin, who was sitting on
his porch near by, saw the assault, but
could not say anything about any
words being passed.
Mrs. Claypoole, neighbor, who was
looking out of window Of her house,
saw Mrs. Reeves run across and
heard her tell Mrs. Slimm to get out.
She saw the blows struck. Witness
knew of the extent of the injuries for
she helped to dress the bruises for two
weeks.
Mrs. Reeves was called. She said
Sturgis had told her he was going to
move. There was tenant in prospect
and it was known that some papering |
must be done, SO Mrs Reeves went
over to see what was wanted She met
Mrs. Slimm coming out and Mrs.
Reeves asked what are you doing |
here? Get out" To this Mrs. Slimm |
said "hal hal" and made movement |
to strike. AS the latter made two |
movements to hit the witness, Mrs.
Reeves, having the rake in her hand,
let it fall on the arm and shoulder OF
Mrs. Slimm.
James Berry was called and identi-
fed Walter Greenwood who, he said,
was in the hotel soon after the occur
renee and said he had seen some scrap. |
He said he thought Mrs. Slimm had
to strike Mrs. Reeves
This concluded the testimony and
James Mercer Davis, who represented |
the defendant, presented paper sign
ed by number of persons who certi-
fed to the good character Of Mrs. |
Reeves, who is the wife of Charles |
Reeves, baggage master on the Penn
sylvania railroad. He criticised the
manner in which the case was
saying he had never
before seen private counsel engaged |
to act as prosecutor. He thought
it looked like a case of perse-
cutor, with desire to get revenge. He
said he would not contend that the
offence was justified. Mrs. Reeves
was doubtless in the wrong and did |
not have any right to commit the as
sault, but he could not see that the
state was called upon to punish any
body and put hardship on the de-
PENDANT just to crafty somebody's
spite. He asked that fine be inn
posed.
Robert Peacock replied and said he !
had been authorized by prosecutor
Kelsey to represent the state in this
matter. He ridiculed the request that
Mrs. Reeves be allowed to go because
she had children who would feel the |
disgrace. He held that the defendant
did not appear as woman of such
good character as was represented for it
was safe to assume that if such was
the case counsel for the defence would
have had witnesses on the stand to |
prove his contention. He objected to |
a fine being imposed as it would not
have good effect and the woman
would go out of court and laugh at the
ease with which she escaped the pun
ishment she richly deserved-that OF |
Judge Wells told the defendant to
stand up. He said her counsel had
entered a plea of guilty and that there
was not any legal or moral excuse for
the assault. Hatred and jealously |
have no right to move anyone to COM
NIT lawless deeds. II there is neigh
borhood feud, if there are taunts and !
slurs the person aggrieved has rem
edy. Mrs. Slimm had perfect right
to be at the house where the assault
occurred. He said he would place
fine on the defendant. There would not