Five Mile Beach weekly journal., 1923-01-12

met on the particular night he stated
he had only been there oHSe-Pr twice
throughout the summer
Willie Jacobs was now called to the
stand. He stated that he was 16 years
of age, his parents conducted a lace
and lining business at Cape May in
the summer and that they owned
homes in Philadelphia and Cape May.
He said he had been a student at
Banks Business College the months of
September and October of this year
and that during the summer he kept
books for his parents. He then told
the same story of the actions of the
three men on the night of August I'd,
and admitted not having known about
the robbery nor of being implicated
up to the time of his arrest. Cross
examination brought no change in his
story, except that Surman was the last
of the three to come into the room in
the early hours of the morning of the
Sd. When asked why he had run from
the restaurant to the room he shrugged
his shoulders and said, "Felt like run
ming" He now repeated the story he
had told in direct examination of the.
case where he had ridden up to the.
house of John Frey, on Ottens Canal,
at which time a bundle of the sweat
ers had been sold.
Former Prosecutor Eugene Cole.
was now called as a witness of the
state in rebuttal and a paper was
shown to him for identification. He
admitted it was written in his hand
writing and signed by VIM. Jacobs and
Mrs. Katherine Tullidge (as a witness)
in his Office in the court house. An
objection was here raised by lawyer
Lloyd who said this action was not in
order. A controversy with the Judge,
followed in which Judge Eldredge said
that he entire matter was a question
of procedure and that he would reject
the objection, at the same time giving
Lloyd the right to recall his client as I
a witness in counter rebuttal. The
former prosecutor was now cross-ex-
am1ned by Lawyer Lloyd in which he
said that the defendant, Willie Jacobs,
had come to his Office accompanied by
Amen Jacobs and Mrs. Tullidge
(who was we'll known to HIM who,
pleaded for the two men, saying she
knew them we'll and was interested in
them. Preliminary talk between the.
four followed, he said, in which he,
cautioned Jacobs and then wrote the
statement verbatim. No promise was
forthcoming from him (Cole) for the
paper and on the contrary, he stated,
he warned Willie that whatever was
written would be used against him.
Willie expressed a desire to tell the.
truth and so he took the statement.
down, chiefly in Willie's own words.
He then read it over twice to the de-
PENDANT and then Mrs. Tullidge went
over the paper with Willie after which
he signed it and she signed her name
as a witness. The paper was now
read to the court and jury. It stated
that Willie knew the various ones in
the crowd as friends or merely as
passing characters. 1t next said that
Willie was not in wildwood on the
nights of Augustus to 9Th, but that
during these nights had been at his
home in Cape May making out bills.
He said he knew nothing about the
Rosella Shop robbery until his arrest,
and that he had never had any part i'm
the plan or execution of the robbery.
And also said that he and Amen ia
cobs were not of kin.
The noon recess was now declared
by the court.
At 100 the court r%econvened and
Katherine Jacobs, mother of Willie.
took the witness stand. Questioned
about the kin relationship of Willie
and Amen, she said that she was a
godmother to Amen and that in the.
Greek Church this made Amen and
Willie the same as cousins. Willie
was now called back to the stand and
questioned about the statement and
the fact he had said in this statement
in which he said that on the night of
August I'd he had not been in wild
He said that since making the
statement he had recalled that he was
in Wildwood on the night Of the I'd,
for he remembered seeing the girls in
Surman's rooms on that night.
The final appeals to the jury were
now in order. In his charge to the
jury Lawyer Sooy stated that his
clients, Surman and Jaffe, were both
of good %parentage, coming to Wild
wood prepared to enjoy themselves for
summer. They made bad acquaint-
ances which resulted in a bad in1u-
ence over them. The only evidence
against his clients, he said, was that
Conley, a self-confessed thief, who
he found himself caught tried to
shift the blame of ring leader upon
Darby, a fugitive from justice, and to
bring the other of his friends in as
scapegoats. Sooy here referred to
Arnold's testimony in which he had
failed to implicate the others, and in
fact stated had not seen them during
the night in question until in the early