Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1891-02-03

| Two Young Women Who Were Searched In
Store Charge Him with Assault

store Charge Him with Assault
Hr ACCUSED THEM or sHopIIrrrxo AND srn-
JfcrEp THEN TO A skARoH-rEK COURT DE-
cLAnEs THAT THEIR INNOCENCE WAS PROVED
AND IxrosEs A HEAvY FINE on IHE orfIcrR
Mss Laura O'Hare and Mrs. Frances Rag
land, nee oHare. who yesterday entered suit
for s2o,o damages agains; Nessrs. Woodward
Lothrop ct al, for alleged false arrest. 40
Published in yesterdays STAR. appeared in the
Police Court today and charged Mr.. Charles
T. Finder with assault Mr.. Finder is the de-
tective in the employ of Woodward a Lo;hrop
Mr. II. E. Davis appeared for the defendant
The o.fenses were alleged to have been COM
mitted last Friday.
MRS. RAeLASp's STATEMENT
Mrs. Ragland testified that she went into
Woodward & Lo'hrop's and made a purchnse
While waiting for her package a man came IN.
seized her by the arm and accuses, her Of steal
ing diamond ring. The man ordered her into
anotner room and felt about her coat. One of
the female clerks was sent for and she thor
oGGhly searched witness When the man pulled
open her Goa. her sister was present
She said that she had purchased two napkin
rings from one of the clerks and was waiting
Tor her change and package. Her sister. she
0eeis. was dAro lbtttu INTO the room anu the
man attempted to search her also. She iden,i-
ned the defendant as the man about whom she
had testified.
On cross-examination witness said she mr.
chased pair Of square napkin rings. but she
thought there were some damond-shaped nap
kin rings there; the officer first accused her Of
having stolen diamond ring. but he afterward
said acknowledged napkin rings.
Counsel asked witness what language was
used and she said that the officer Mr.. Finder
said, Where is that napkin ring?'
Il asked him." she said. What do Won
mean and his reply was something about L
couldn't bluff him."
The defendant. she said. also searched her
other bundles. which she had in her hands and
not under her coat. While she was being
searched the defendant remained in the room,
but had his back to witness. She denied thar
she picked up napkin and put il in her coat.
When questioned by Mr.. Mullowney witness
said she had lived here all her life and that her
father was a grocer on 18th street, but he is now
dead. She said she was married yesterday.
THE SISTERS STORY.
Miss Laura O'Hare gave similar testimony
and said that the first thing Mr. Finder said to
her sister was: What have you done with that
diamond napkin ring2'
She told substantially the same story as that
OF her sister and said that Mr.. Hendricks. the
superintendent Of the store. told her to come
back In a day or two ard if the rings were
found it would be all right and if no. they
would have to keep out of the store or they
would be arrested. Mrs. Young. the matron,
searched her. the same she did her sister,
MR.. FLINDERS SIDE OFT.
The defendant said that he had been en-
ployed in the Boston House permanently for
more than year. During that period he said
| he had caught between seventy-fiye and eighty
people shoplifting. and" he said, ''they were
mostly respectable people"
He testified that he saw thessisters in front OF
| the silver counter and he said they acted sus-
piciously. He first saw them from the ladies'
reception room. which Is above the main floor
He said he heard Miss Laura o Hare saw Take
| IL, and her sister, Mrs. Ragland, took one OF
the napkin rings and put il in her coat. De
PENDANT walked to where they were and asked heI
! for the napkin ring and she asked What
napkin ringy' He said he invited her into the
other room in as polite a manner as possible
and had the matron do the searching lie said
he touched the ladies on the arm
and asked them to walk into the
small room. When questioned by the court
defendant said il probably took him two min
utes to reach the ladies'. and during that time
be was out Of their sight. There was no napkin
ring found on the moor, but there were two
rings missing that day.
WHAT ARE SUSPICIOUS ACTIONS?
Speaking of the defendants remarks abou.
wanted to know if such actions were not the re.
suit of having to wait so long for tn cir change,
and witness explained that there was differ
ence between such actions and suspicious
actions.
Judge Miller said he had had experience in
such matters and he knew how people were
restless while waiting for their change after
making their purchases.
When asked what bundles the ladies had de-
PENDANT said they had half dozen pairs of
stockings and two glass bottles and they were
wrapped in newspaper.
THE MATRoS WHO SEARCHED THEM.
Mrs. Young. the matron, testified that the
ladies were in the store Friday morning.
While in the waiting room one of them wrote
letter and wrapped some bundles. In the
afternoon Mr.. Finder asked her to search the
ladies and she did SO.
who gave you authority to search them?,
'Mr. Finder
Are you a police matron2'
NO, sir; I'm matron Of the store"
"Polce matrons are provided for that pur-
pose, said the judge, ''and you had better take
advice before doing this again.
THE CLERK WHO WAITED on THEM.
Miss Haskins, the clerk who waited on the
compliments, testified that after she waited on
them she stepped aside to send the money to
the cashier. All the boxes on the case. she
SAID, were niied ana wfen she returned there
was an empty box. Two napkin rings were
missing, but she had no idea what became of
them.
Mr.. George F. Hendricks. superintendent OF
the store, also gave testimony and was exam
ined at some length by the court.
THE COURTS REVIEW OF THE CASE
The court called attention to Mr.. Flinders
evidence that the ring was taken from the case
and not from the box.
The defendant and Miss Haskins were re-
called and again examined.
Referring to the empty box produced in evil
dence the court said that il established the in
nocence of Mrs Ragland and Miss Hare be-
yond any donbt.
After discussion between counsel and the
court the latter remarked tina. the case was not
to be disposed of in the light of "a heavy blow
delivered or where private malice is vented. Ii
was business transaction and nothing else
When a person takes such an action
he does it at his own risk. His act must be
measured according to its consequences. sIn
this case, said the judge. Il must say that the
proof shows that Mr.. Finder did not have even
reasonable grounds for suspicion
Continuing. the court said: This case. in nv
judgment, merits punishment. do not think
that there was any malice on the part Of Mr.
Finder.
He is a good officer and always has been, but
his act was the result of desire to 90 his duty
II shows the necessity of an officer being sure