Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1889-01-08
ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS.
A Charge Of False Pretenses on Tria

ONE HUNDRED DOLLARS.
A Charge Of False Pretenses on Trial.
TESTIMONY IN THE CASE OF DE HUGHES. ALIAS
NEWMAN, ALIAS. ST. CLAIR IN THE CRIMINAL
SONS.
In the Criminal Court, Judge Montgomery,
this morning, the trial of Dallas N. DeHughes,
alias Marion D. Newman, alais @. NJ. st. Clair,
indicted for obtaining money by false pretenses
(Sl0O), about October 10 last from Breese &
Sons, of Baltimore, was resumed this morning.
Assistant District Attorney A. A. Lipscomb
(who had been indisposed for few days.. with
Mr.. Mullowney, appeared for the government,
and Mr.. Campbell Darlington for the defendant.
Mr.. Oscar F. Breese, of Breese Sons, Of
Baltimore, testified that defendant under the
name Of CIV. st. Clair, was employed by them
as a solicitor of life insurance in this city for
three months, commencing September last
Witness identified letter from defendant
dated October IS last. as having been received
by his firm. This letter was in answer to a let
ter OF October II, acknowledging receipt of
check which was acceptable, and stating that
his (defendant's) daughter was very low and
her death expected. The next morning they
received a telegram announcing the death of
the daughter, and they then sent defendant a
check on the Farmers and Mechanics bank for
800.
The check and the telegram with the letter
were received in evidence. The telegram
read my daughter passed away at this morn
ing. Send me check at once"
On cross-examination witness related the
course of business with the defendant, and Mr.
Darlington claimed that the firm did not use
ordinary prudence and common caution in
making inquiries into the statements of the de-
PENDANT
Witness continued. saying that the money
was advanced on account to aid defendant TO
bury his daughter. They had guaranteed st.
Clair, as special agent $50 per month against
commissions, and up to the time of the arrest
there had been paid him $685.
Observation-Disclosures said that October 10 St.
Clair's account had been overdrawn Sl75.
RESPONSIBILITIES advanced the money to
defendant because his daughter was dead"
Re-cross-They sometimes advanced money
to agents. They advanced defendant $50
September to move his family from Tennes-
see.
Mr.. Darlington here raised the point that
the venue improperly laid: that it should
have been laid in Baltimore, and read a num-
Der of uthorities-Wharton, Bishop and
others. The letter was sent from this city and
the money obtained in Baltimore. and he
claimed that Baltimore was the place for trial
Ne leIter containing the cneck was legally
the property of the defendant the moment il
went into the hands Of the postmaster in Bal
timore.
This point was overruled and exceptions
noted.
David Rittenhouse testified as to the payment
of the check at Riggs & Co.'S.
Mrs. Emma NJ. Sheridan testified that st.
Clair had room at her house in October last;
never heard Of him having daughter here.
but had heard him worry about the failure of
letters to come from his family.
Detective Raft testified to the conversation
he had with the prisoner: that he spoke of his
stepdaughter Pearl, saying that he had no
daughters of his own; that his stepdaughter
Pearl was in Tennessee. and he was then about
to send her present. This closed the evidence
on both sides.
RULING OF THE COURT.
After recess the court said. as to the ques-
ton raised, that his impression was that the
offense of false pretenses was complete when
the party parts with his money. Should. how
ever, he direct a verdict of not guilty it would
end the case, and if the motion was overruled
no harm would be done, for the verdict could
be set aside and the case could be passed upon
in General Term.
The government did not open the argument
and Mr.. Darlington, for the defendant, argued
that there could be no connection, as ii was ex-
plicitly stated that the money was on account.
charged against the defendant, the sum to be
repaid by his services. The government did not
reply.
THE COURT INSTRUCTED THE JURY
that the elements of the offense were that de.
PENDANT made the pretense; that it was false
that he knew it to be false, and that it was fol
the purpose of inducing the party to part with
something. and that the prosecuting witness
believed the false pretense. He then reviewed
the claim of the government, and said that the
defendant admitted writing the letter and
sending the telegram, and that, not
outstanding the pretense, it was not the
pretense which induced the sending of the
check but that on the simple fact that he was
in the employment of the firm the money
would have been sent. If they found that de-
PENDANT sent this letter with the intention to
cheat them out of the amount of the check he
should be convicted. If the pretense of a sick
and dying daughter was the sole or substan-
tial part Of the inducement that led to the
sending of the check, the case was made out.
They should be satisfied beyond a reasonable
doubt of the guilt and must find the allega-
tions made out, and that the check was pro-
cured with felonious intent before they could
convict.
The jury retired at 2:05 o'clock
A VERDICT OF GUILTY.
At 3:20 the jury brought in verdict OF
guilty.