There was a midday break in the hearing. When resumed in the afternoon, the first witness was Luther Chadwick, who stated he heard the shots fired, observed a team being driven up Fifth Street, with Italians coming out of the trench in the direction of the wagon. He saw Smith firing his gun. Next was George Shapleigh, who saw men standing in the area of the trench and observed Smith approach and talk to them. “One had a shovel and struck at Smith.” Hull came along with the team, and Smith jumped the trench and got into the wagon. The Italians started to follow and Smith “drew his revolver and fired.” Someone gave a yell, and “the men came out of the ditch.”

David Lilley testified that he was on Fifth Street and “saw Smith and the Italians having a tussle.” Smith had one down on the ground, the others stood nearby; Smith crossed the ditch and got into Hull’s wagon, and he observed him fire his revolver. He saw the Priestly boy get shot. He was followed by Samuel Griffin, who, according to the reporter, without providing specifics, “corroborated the testimony of Mr. Lilley.”

The next witness was Lorenzo Smith. He stated that he was employed as overseer of construction. Thursday morning, he went to the work area on Fifth Street, involving 50 to 60 employees. One of them asked why Mike Russo was not on the job. Smith said because he did not want him. “He said Mike no work we not work.” I told him he was discharged and to go get his pay. The man went to the office. Dacey was not there, but someone located him near First Street, and he advised that he would reinstate the discharged employees. But back at the trench, Smith had fired a third worker who was demanding he be paid on the spot. Smith says he told that man to go find Dacey, but he refused, and Smith took the man’s tools, a pick and shovel, away from him. He then says he crossed the trench to get into Hull’s wagon, when one employee struck him on the arm and someone else hit him on the side. The first man threw some stones; others were beginning to come out of the ditch, and “I fired the revolver to frighten the men.”

Facing cross-examination, Smith claimed that “he had no trouble with the men.” He was afraid of the two he had discharged, and the men had started coming out of the trench before he fired his gun. He said he “was afraid when he heard the yell because he had heard it given before when there was trouble with the Italians.”

Walter F. Gage testified he was in the area delivering milk and “saw there was trouble.” Men were “closing in around the team and striking at the men in the team, then he saw one man draw a revolver and fire.”

Ralph Hough said he was standing in front of his house and saw Smith struck with a shovel. Men began to get out of the trench. Smith began firing his revolver. Hough got himself safely behind a tree. (You may remember Ralph Hough as being the father of bank embezzler Harry Hough. Although their home was on Fifth Street, Ralph owned and developed property somewhat north of there; hence the name Hough Street.) The reporter then states that “Hull repeated his testimony of Friday,” but what that was and where that took place is not recorded. Patrick Devlin testified that he had been on Chestnut Street and observed men standing around the team in a threatening manner. He saw dirt being thrown and heard a revolver being fired. And finally, John B. Richardson testified that he had been at the corner of Fifth and Grove streets. He saw Smith take a shovel away from one worker, saw three of the men following him, and one struck him with a shovel. At that point, he heard a whoop and observed men coming out of the trench, then heard shots fired, the yell, and the shots coming close together. The evidence was finished. Judge Frost withheld a decision until the following day.

From time to time, the Daily Republican had an editorial column, with the heading of “We Guess,” presumably written by John Scales, though no name is attached. The following appeared in the Friday edition of the paper:

“That the Italians will be peaceable if properly and kindly managed.
That they are a quick tempered set and do not understand how to reason in English, but their temper will cool as quickly as it rises.
That they should be so treated as not to make their temper rise, either quickly or slowly; give them bosses who will use them without abusing, or ill-treating them.
That if they cannot be governed without pistols, they cannot be by the use of pistols; pistol shooting endangers other person’s lives besides those the shots are aimed at.
That the people of Dover have not the least occasion to fear the Italian workmen; they will not molest those who do not molest them.
That no one feels worse about the sad affair yesterday than Mr. Dacey, the contractor, and he will do everything to avoid the repetition of any such altercations.
That the public should be on guard against false statements in regard to the Italians.”

An odd mixture of what might be taken as well-meaning fatherly advice, but with more than a bit of a condescending tone. The “Italians” might be newcomers, but given the size of the water works project it appears likely that they are here to stay for a substantial period of time. In fact, construction on the project will continue for a number of years, during which time there will be other incidents of confrontations that will end up in the local headlines (and out-of-state coverage). These will be the subject of some later articles in our series.

(to be continued)