Weekly Chillicothe crisis. (Chillicothe, Livingston Co., Mo.) 1878-19??, 1882-09-07
MIR. Bull and Mrs. Egypt.

LONDON Echo, Aug. y
John Bull was charged before the
bench with havingcommited gross as
sault upon Mrs. Egypt at Alexandria
on the llth ultimo.
The complainant, respectable-look-
ing woman, who said that she was the
mother of large family of children,
deposed that not very long ago her
late husband, who was unfortunately a
man of very eXtravagant habits, fell
into the company of gang Of advcr-
tising money lenders. Knowing that
he was Il substantial householder, these
loan-oflice keepers had persuaded him
TO take loans at most cNtOrtionate
rate of interest, ranging at from l3to
26! per cent. Only portion OF the
sums borrowed was paid in cash, the
remainder being paid in pictures, wines,
jewclry, and other useful articles.
Since the demise of her late husband
She had made the most desperate ef-
forts to keep up the installments that
were due to the loan-oilice, and had
even parted with the clothes of herself
and her children in order to raise the
necessary payments. The loan-oflice
people had put in the defendent and
others as brokers' men. Her sons
had guaranteed the payment of the in
Stallmcnts of the debt but rs they had
not at the same time paid the expenses
OF the men in possession, the defend
ant and those acting with him on the
llth ultimo proceeded TO make a wan
ton attack upon her property, which
brought her to the very verge of ruin.
She had resisted as well as she was
able, but the defendant had committed
Il cruel assault upon herin consequence,
the signs Of which were manifest to all
who were present in court.
The defendant, strong, powerful
man, stated that he was only acting in
obedience to orders. He was wholly |
with the circumstances
under which the debt was incurred, and
when the loan-oilice people who were
connected with him by ties of relation
ship, employed him tointcrfere, he had
been careful to conform to the strict
letter of the law. He was sincerely
sorry for Mrs. Egypt, whose late hus-
band had led her into such trouble by
his reckless and cXtravagant conduct,
but he submitted that the legal claim
Df the people upon whose behalf he
acted was indisputablc.
One of the magistrates here asked
the defendant disputed the
plaintiffs statement that the money
had been lent at from 10 to 26l per
cent interest.
Defendant replied that very likely it
was true, but he had nothing to do With
hat. The plaintiff had threatened his
men, and was, about, indeed, TO turn
hem out Of the house. The assault
occurred through his attempting to dis
lrm her and prevent her doing any
mischief. He denied that he had used
more violence than was necessary ,
Indcr the circumstances.
The bench said that there could be
10 doubt that the poor woman had been ,
most cruelty treated by the rascally
lsurers who had tempted her husband
o his destruction. There could be no
moral justification for the defendants
'onduct, though he might have a legal !
lcfcnse. The defendant would be re-
handed in order to give him an opror
unity to prodnc" thr powers under
which hn acted, whose validity would
,c examined by the court. He deeply
with the plaintiff. Through
10 fault of her own she had been