Perth Amboy evening news., 1919-01-08
Jury to Get Gross Case
Late This Afternoon
(Coptinued from page l.

&&6O
our countryman, Csipo. 1 think a word
from your word an lntercession would
have an effect"
ALSO I asked the women and chill
dren to go especially. as 1 think they
would have more influence than the
men,"
This completed the defense's exam
ination of the witness and he was
turned over to Assistant Prosecutor
John A. Coan, who conducted a grill
ing cross-examination. He brought
out that there had been much trouble
between the priest n the banker.
Mr.. Coan also developed the fact that
neither the priest nor his counsel had
attempted to get out a warrant
against Reichman, editor of the New
Jersey Hirado, for his attacks upon
the priest. They had appealed to the
prosecutor, Joseph +. Stricken, who
has no power to issue warrants.
Q. (By Mr.. Coan)-Did you on Oc-
tober 80 go to Reichman's. Ayes.
Q.-Isn't it a fact that on October
80 when you left you left Reichman
bleeding there; didn't you? (Mr.
Brown objected but the question wa
allowed.
Q.-What is you answer? An
self defense. yes, when he attacaed
me with a two by -four pole ten feet
long.
Q.-what was it you struck Reich
man with? (Mr. Brown objected and
the objection was upheld).
Q.-You went directly to Reich
mans from Csipo's, didn't you? A
Yes.
Q.-Csipo did take the paper from
the window, didn't he? Al didn't
See 1t.
Odd you see the paper In the
window again? Ayes, about Octo-
Der 81.
Q.-There were two papers there at
that time? Ayes, two
The priest denied that he was angry
with Csipo and Reichman on Novem-
Der /. He also said that he a torn
up the notes of his sermon delivered
November / Immediately after he had
delivered 1t to the congregation of
his church. When asked how he had
heard of the trouble at Csipo's place,
Father Gross replied that he had been
telephoned to. MY. Coan asked the
priest If he mentioned to the congre-
CATION that he had attacked Reich
man or that the latter had attacked
him, and he replied no.
1t was at this point, at 5 o'clock,
when both sides had completed their
examination of the priest h a Judge
Daily called a halt to the trial for the
day and announced that he had de-
cided not to hold n night session.
The defense then said that they had
forty essential witnesses to put on the
stand.
Fred NJ. Voorhees,, county clerk OF
Somerset county, was the first witness
OF the afternoon. The state intro
duced him to show that an indictment
against Louis Csipo in that county
had been nolle pressed by the state,
after a conviction for perjury found
against him, was set aside by the SUI
preme court. Csipo was then recalled
to the stand and explained the alleged
attack upon him and his actions on
hat day.
The state rested It's case and the
defense opened with a motion that
a directed verdict be entered, but this
was denied.
Mr.. Brown contended that the evil
dence to be produced by the defense
would show that the address by Faith
er Gross was not conducive to violent
action by the congregation and that
he believed the jury would find that
he had merely requested the congre-
cation to go to Csipo's place and to
request Csipo to take the offending
paper out of his window.
Father Gross in testifying declared
that he had gone to see Prosecutor
SLIlthGt Will lC6aio " ooNtb6 SIP
arrested on q libel charge but that
the prosecutor refused to do so, stat
ing that he had been Csipo's counsel
The priest in being recalled to the
stand and cross-examined by Mr.
Coan was asked IL he had not paid
a visit to the Office of Mr.. Stricken In
company with J. Logan Clevenger
editor of the Perth Amboy EVENING
NEWS, last June with regard to an
article which Father Gross wanted
published in the paper. The priest
answered that he was at Mr.. Strick-
er's office the same time as Mr.. Clev-
enger but explained tina they had
not come together, they meeting in
the anti-room of h prosecutors
office. Father Gross claimed that Mr.
Clevenger had come to see Mr.. Strick-
er with reference to an article which
he (Father CROSSE wanted published
in the NEWS, in order to secure the
prosecutors decision as to whether OF
not 1t was libel.
Attorney Coan then asked the
priest II the person mentioned in the
article was not Csipo. The witness al
first denied hat Csipo's name was
used but later admitted 1t. Upon be-
ing asked by Coan II Mt. Stricken had
had been reversed. Father Gross an
swered NO"
MI. Coan then called attention to
the second visit of Father Gross to
the office of Prosecutor Stricken, ask
ing the witness IL he had not again
gone to Mr.. Stricker's Office in July
and told of his intention of starting
action against Csipo. The priest de-
MED going In July. stating that 1t was
sometime either in August or Sep
TENDER. According to Father Gross
testimony Mr.. Stricken declared al
that time that he would not interfere
in a civil act against Csipo az Csipo
was his (Stricker's) client.
When Csipo was recalled to the
stand yesterday afternoon Attorney
Brown asked him IL he had not pur-