White Pine news. [volume] (East Ely, Nev.) 1920-1923, 1923-11-11

given three forms of verdict which
they might select. The first was
guilty of assault and battery"
the second guilty of assault" and
the third mot guilty" After few
minutes talk it was agreed by the
twelve men that while they believed
Walton culpable to a certain degree,
they should administer rebuke to
mob rule, which they could do by
voting for the second form of verdict.
which they did without further de-
lay F. w. Fletcher. as foreman, de-
livered the verdict
Mike Murphy, not defendant, but
an employe roomirg at house No.
66S, McGill, testified that he met
Walton that evening at the house,
and the latter complained of having
chills. Walton retired to bed and
three men soon entered his room,
ordering him to get up. These he
identified as Peterson, Wickburg and
O'Brien. In the crowd outside were
others, about fifteen all told. Wal
ton told them he was under the doc
tors orders, but he finally complied
with the order Witness heard Wick.
burg say Walton would feel worse
than that before they got through
with him. He saw Walton walk from
the house and obey the orders to
straddle the rail He saw the mans
feet being tied. Witness after it was
over talked with Gosden, asking him
why it was done, and the young man
replied, Because wives and sweet.
hearts have to be protected
The witness said Peterson was one
of the men in the house and he heard
some one ask, SIS everything ready
Pete?"
Peterson testified that he was at
Cyprus hall shortly before the as
sault and that Haller had suggested
riding Walton on a rail. He weEt to
Walton's room. but denied being a
leader. He said Deputy Sheriff Gill
lespie rode in an auto in the process
sion, but did not interfere to protect
Walton.
w. r. Miller told Of Joining in
the crowd as a sightseeing adven-
ture, but did not take part. He iden-
tilted most of the defendants as the
ones committing the assault.
Tweedy, against whom the charge
had been dismissed, told of being at
Cyprus hall ,and the discussion about
taking walton out toward Cherry
Creek and told not to be seen again
at McGill. He likewise identified sew
eral of the accused.
Walton, as complaining witness,
told of the preliminary incidents,
saying the men told him to put on
warm clothes as he was to be taken
a long distance He was placed on
the rail, roughly handled, and when
one end was allowed to drop one of
the men said. Don't 10 that again
It's not right" He claimed to have
lost consciousness and did not re-
cover his senses until on his way TO
Ely in an auto. The deputy sheriff
with him told him he had been
served right. He admitted writing
the letter inclosing So to the woman
Mr.. Haller, the principal defense
witness, swore that tho woman COM
planned to hin. of being attacked by
Walton, of writing her threatening
letters, and it was his place as her
employer in charge of the boarding
house to speak to Walton about it,
Walton resented tbs, caying he had
no right to butt in The letters we're
referred to again.
Mr.. Edwards assailnd Haller up-
on the point of his saying it would
not do for him to take an active part
in the assault because of the posi-
tion he held, asking if he We're not
looking out for number one, to which
The witness replied, You bet vas. =
Defendants Peterson and Wick burg
admitted their part in the assault, the
latter answering question prompt
ly by saying it WAS he who tied Wal
tons feet together. Defendant Burr
made similar admissions, but denied
that Walton was unconscious while
in the car.
The impression gained of the de.
icHddbto 10 Lildt tutg were uOI OI the
drinking class, baing clean and well
young men, mostly mar
ried, who were under misapprehen-
sion about the case. While none ad-
mitted being ashamed their looks
betrayed that feeling upon the part
of several.
In his address to the jury Mr. Ed
wards urged strongly the upholding
OF law and order against the ten
dency to mob violence so aften prac-
ticed. Walton had been tried be-
fore competent jury Of the alleged
crime against the woman, which had
not been sustained.
r. l.. Quayle and J. NJ. Lockhart in
speaking for their clients, while not
denying the assault, held that wom-
anhood must be protected ana the
import of their argument was that
the rail riding was justified.
1t is the intention of the defend
-