The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1895-03-29

prisoner should give him unincumoered
real estate as security therefor, ana mat
such security was required as condt-
ton precedent to such loan. that tne
prisoner thereupon offered certain rear
estate as security for the loan and rep
resented that Il was free from incunl-
brance. and suggested that a certain
LAWYER make an examination OF the utie'
that the prisoner did secure the services
of said lawyer to examine the title WIN
the instructions that the lawyer was not
TO report prior deed Of trust upon 'he
property: that the examination ana ao-
stract was made without reference "
this prior deed OF trust In pursuance OF
the Instructions of the prisoner; that the
said abstract was submitted to Eoert
by the prisoner with the representation
on his part to Ebert that there were no
other membranes upon the property
than that set out in the abstract that
Ebert believed this representation and
acted upon it and loaned the prisoner
81 80 upon the faith of such representa-
ton; and that the prisoner, at The time
he made the representation and obtained
the loan knowing the representation was
false. and that there was an unsatished
prior deed OF trust duly recorded upon
the property for large amount, to wit;
About s2COO. Then the Court charges
you that the prisoner obtained the 81. 10
by false pretences and is guilty of the
offence with which he stands charged.
THE VALUE OF NO CONSEQUENCE.
If the jury believe from the evidence
as set out I'm the preceding instruction.
they should find the prisoner guilty Of
the offence with which he stands charg-
ed: Notwithstanding they may further
believe that the real estate IN question
was equal in value to both deeds OF trust
or that the prisoner, subsequent TO the
alleged crime. made d settlement with
Ebert, which was accepted as satisiacto-
ry by Ebert.
r. however. the jury believe the money
was borrowed from Ebert by the pris-
oner for the purpose of paying OF the
prior deed OF trust. and that he intended
and believed at the time that he would
be able so to do, then the prisoner did
not obtain the money with intent TO de-
fraud and you should acquit him
THE ARGUMENT
Mr.. James w Gordon opened the ar
gument for the prosecution and IN
clear forcibIe and convincing manner
presented his side of the case, bringing
out every point that had been made by
the witnesses of the Commonwealth.
Colonel VIM. +. Wickham followed for
the defence and laid speci II weight upon
the fact that the jury could only find the
defendant guilty, if they were convinced
that the money had been obtained UNI
der false pretences and with fraudulent
intention.
Mr.. d. c. Richardson closed the argu-
ment for the defence and went I'm detail
over the transactions of the defendant,
explaining from his standpoint the mo-
tives at the various stages. He stated
that the defendant had no intention to
commit fraud
commemorative Attorney, Harry NJ.
Smith. made the final address for the
prosecution and dwelIed at some length
on the instructions given by the Court.
explaining in detail every point and eau
ttoning the jury. that they were sworn 10
try the case according to the law and ev-
ideuce.
The Jury retired at $40 p. NJ, and re-
turned 10 the courtroom at $50 7. NJ.
After the names had been called the
usual question was asked as to whether
they had agreed on verdict, ana MI.
J. II. Montague. the foreman, replied
In the negative. and after several OF the
Jurors had declared that there was no
possibility of reaching an agreement the
jury was discharged for the term and
the case went over until the second day
in the next term. Tuesday, April "a.
on motion Of Colonel Wickham the bail
bond Of 5000 was then renewed with Mr..
3. Hassell PlUemacher's father-in-law.
as surety.