Los Angeles herald., 1890-05-07
THE CLARK CASE.
How Goods Were Obtained
By a Deed and Notes.
People Who State That They
Were Taken In.
A Pasadena Lawyer Undergoing Ex-
animation in Court.
The Evidence of a Number of Alleged Vic.
tins Admitted Notwithstanding the
Defendants Objections.

P. M. Seaman, of Pasadena. all of whom
are charged with having obtained prop
erty by means of false and fraudulent
representations, was resumed at $50
O'Clock yesterday morning before Justice
Lockwood, in the presence of large
number of interested spectators. The
proceedings commenced with the argu-
ments on the objection of the
defendants to the admittance of
the. testimony of E. E. Crandall,
who had been called for the prose
cution on Monday afternoon, shortly
before the hour of adjournment.
The defense argued that as the
purchase of property from Crandall
was distinct and separate act to the
one charged in the complaint, it was,
therefore, not part in the case, and
could not be properly introduced.
The prosecution, however, cited au-
thorities from this and other states in
support of its argument that evidence of
the kind it sought to introduce could be
brought in for the purpose of showing
common design on the part of the de-
PENDANTS to conspire to defraud trades
men.
The court, after hearing both sides of
the question, overruled the objection
made by the defense, and E. f. Crandall
was called to the stand, which he occu-
pied until the noon recess. He testified
in effect that on November 4th last Clark
called at his store, No. 124 South Spring
street, and informed him that he was
attorney for Miss Seaman, of Pasadena,
who wished to purchase e. stove and
some household hardware on credit, for
a house she was furnishing. Clark pro-
duced deed for the property on Colorado
court, Pasadena, which he said was worth
from $l5, 900 to $40, 900, and upon which
the only lncumbrance was 81 800 mort
gage. He explained that his client
owned considerable property in Brook
lyn, whence she expected a remittance
on the 1st of the month. Crandall asked
the lawyer to bring his fair client into
town, and intimated that the matter
might be arranged. Accordingly Clark
went away, but returned later with Miss
Seaman, whose ladylike demeanor soon
won the hardware merchants good will.
During the conversation which occurred
between the merchant and Miss Seaman
she took occasion to mention the fact
that her property in Brooklyn adjoined
that OF namesake of Crandall The
hardware man was not sure, but he was
of the opinion that it was one of his re-
lations; and with this pleasant little
interlude the business was transacted,
the hardware being picked out and Miss
Seaman's note for the amount of the
bill, due at thirty days, left in exchange
Crandall wrote, but received a reply
c.i1, 70 ho4
Salkey, the manager of the Partisan
Cloak and Suit Company, to the effect
that if he crowded Miss Seaman for the
money, she would homestead her prop
erty and he would not get cent. After
waiting until February, Crandall's pa
tience became exhausted and he went
down to Pasadena with deputy con-
stable to interview Clark. On arrival at
Colorado court he questioned the lawyer
about Miss 'Seaman's property, and the
latter pointed it out to Crandall, who
then asked where the house was that
had formerly been on the lot Clark
replied that it had been moved some
where, but that it was not his business
to say where to. When asked about the
hardware, he said he presumed it was
IN some OF the houses in the neighbor-
hood. On being denied admittance to
the ladies of Clark's household, Gran
dali went away and subsequently got
his property back upon writ of attach
ment.
j. B. Doty, real-estate dealer of
Pasadena, states that he was familiar
with the property owned by Miss Sea-
man at Colorado court. 1t was part of
lots 6 and Z of Mrs. J. X. Hoods tract,
and was worth from $15 to 500 per front
foot. The house was probably worth
5000.
Newell Mathews, carriage manufac-
turer at No. 127 North Los Angeles
street, testified that Clark had called
upon him and told similar story to
that recited to Crandall, and Miss Sea
man called later on and endorsed Clark's
note due in sixty days, for small pony
cart. Clark returned few days later
and obtained another whip, the first one
having been broken. The note, on it's
maturity, was turned over to collector,
but he was finally compelled to obtain a
writ OF attachment for the return of his
! property.
w. NJ. Osborn, saddler, at Also and
Alameda streets, told a similar story
about Clark and Miss Seaman. who OBJ
tanned $32 worth of harness from him.
|
due, but the attorney threatened to
shoot him in his office. He finally re-
ceived the value of his property on a
writ of attachment.
j. Fl. Nelger, manager for Gordan
Bros, the Spring-street tailors, stated
that on the same day, November 4th
last, Clark called with his wife and
sister-in-law, and after examining some
goods, ordered suit ofclothes on credit,
Miss Seaman indorsing his note. On
Clark's return for the clothes week
later, however, Nelger refused to hand
them over, as he had made inquiries
about Clark in the meantime, whereupon
the attorney threatened to sue the tailor
for the goods, but did not
Jas. Sullivan, manager of the Sullivan
cloak and suit store, No. 113 South
Spring street, recited the story of how
Miss Seaman and her sister obtained
property valued at $34 from him under
the same representations as above re-
corded. Mrs. Clark, however, settled
his bill in full yesterday morning.
Chas. Smith, agent for the firm of H.
d. Gates q Co, parted with a surrey
valued at $40 on September II, 1889, in
exchange for note due in ninety davs
upon the same representations as were
| ,,,oIa fo GronIon Ho r.o@ l~.a =