The Dallas weekly herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1885, 1882-09-07

I'd u gross assault
90 Alexandria, on the
Minant, u respect ,ble looking
HiO said that she wa, the mother
ARC family Of children, dep0scd that
very long ago her late husband, who
was unfortunately man OF very exraVa'
CANT habits. fell into the company ~ gang
| of money lenders. Knowing that he was
substantial householder, these loan Office
| keepers had persuaded him TO take loans at
"A most extOrtionatc rate OF interest, rang
! ing ut from ~ to 2Ol per cent. only y
! uortion of tho sums borrowed was paid
| In cash the remainder being paid in pict-
ures, wines, jewclry aud other useless
articles. SiuCe the demise OF her late nus
band she had made tho most desperate ei
forts to keep up the installments which
we're due to ihe loan flee, and lad even
parted with the clothes of herself and her
children in order to raise the necessary pay
ments. The loan Office people hud put III
the defendant and others AS brokersk' men.
Her sons had guaranteed the. payment oil
the installmeuts Of The debt but as they
had not ut the same time paid the expenses
OF the men in possession, the defendant and
!
proceeded 10 make u wanion attack upon
her property, ~ hich had brought her to tue
very verge of ruin. She had resisted as
J well as she was able. but the defendant had
committed a cruel assault upon her IN con-
sequence, the signs OF which were manifest
to all who were present in court.
The defendant, a strong, powerful man,
stated that he was only aching in obedience
TO orders. He was wholly unacquainted
with the circumstances under which the
debt was incurred, and when the loan.oihce
people, who were connected with him by
ties relationship, employed him to inter
fere, he had been careful to conform TO the
strict letter of the law. He was sincerely
sorry for Mrs. Egypt, whose late husband
had led her into such trouble by his reckless
and eXtravagant conduct, but he submitted
that the legal claim of the people upon
whose behalf he acted was indisputable;
One OF the magistrates here asked whether
the defendant disputed the plaintiffs state
ment that the money had been lent at from
- to 264 per cent. interest.
Defendant re, ,lied that very likely 1t was
true, but he had nothing to do with that
| The plaintiff had threatened his men, and
was about, indeed to turn them out OF the
house. The assault occurred through ms
attempting to dIsarm her and prevent her
doing any mischief. He denied that he
had used more violence than was necessary
under the circumstances.
The bench said that there could be no
doubt that the poor woman had been most
cruelty treated by the rascally usurers who
had tempted her husband to his destruction.
There could be no moral justification for
the defendants conduct, though he might
have legal defense. The defendant would
be remanded in order to give him an OPP
portunity to produce the powers under
which he acted, whose validity would be
examined by the court. He deeply symya-
thized with the plaintiff. Through no fault
of her own she had been victimized by an
artful set of schemers, who had run up
her exorbitant claims, the greater, part OF
which observation-disclosures Echo, Au-
| puS. 3.