The morning times., 1895-08-07
NEWMAN's OWN STORY
He Tells of His Methods in Max
Ing Loans.
APPLIED FOR BANK LICENSE
Clerk Montague Contradicts the De-
fendant's Statements-Law wyer La
sclle Testtfies to Knowing of Money
Loaned to a Lady-Ju udge Scott Took
the Case Under Amusement.

the Case Under Amusement.
The case Of Myef B. Newman, charged
with being an unlicensed pawnbroker, was
called up In the police court yesterday after
| noon.
Lawyer Fulton, representing the defend
ent addressed TIE court in favor Of his
motion of Saturday to dismiss the case
whereupon Mr. Pugh objected TO further
discussion of q motion already overruled
by the court Judge Scott sustained Mr..
Pugh, and the case went over.
Mr.. John B. Miller, the only witness for
Government, repeated some of his testi-
mony OF Saturday, to the effect that he had
! borrowed money from Newman, giving a
piano and suit of furniture security,
| and which were taken possession of by
| Newman.
MR.. MILLER'S PIANO
According TO the testimony Of witnesses
for the defense the piano and the furniture
were taken from Miller one year before
the time stated by him, and were turned
over to an auctioneer to be sold They were
| taken by virtue of the deed OF trust, and not
until the loan was due and not paid.
The books of the firm OF auctioneers
were produced to substantiate the testi-
mony of the witnesses for the defense.
After recess of the court Newman was
| called to the stand. He started to testify,
| but the court interrupted him to say that
the district attorney was busy.
After a pause Mr.. Pugh looked up and
asked the cause Of the delay.
I'VE are waiting for you," said Mr..
Fulton
Go ahead" said Mr. Pugh II have
| no desire to listen tn anything Mr.. New
man may say
Newman then resumed his statement. He
testified that he resided at No. 1902 North
| Capitol street, " here he did q business OF
making loans on real and personal prop
erty. He explained his method OF making
| loans taking either a bill of sale or deed
! OF trust. He said he only took possession of
| such property when the loans We're de-
| faulted, and by virtue OF the deed OF trust.
In addition to the deeds OF trust, he took
notes signed by the party to whom the loan
| was made.
NOT AVERsE TO NOTES.
Have you ever taken notes as collateral
security" asked Lawyer Fulton.
Yes, sir" replied Newman.
He testified that he had been doing busi
ness with Miller, probably for four years
| past, and had made several loans to him
| in that time. Part OF these were repaid
| and part, those made on the property
| referred TO in the testimony, Were de-
| fanIted. He took no property from Mr.
| Miller, except by virtue of the deeds OF
| trust
Continuing his statement the defendant
| said that about three years ago he applied
| to the assessors office for bankers
! license. He explained the nature OF his
1 .uata
| tague, aud produced an application for
| such a license, which, he said, he was about
| file. Mr.. Montague informed him however,
| that license was not needed in the business
| whereupon he withdrew his application.
| He applied for Il bankers license because
he thought it would cover the character
| OF business he was IN Dthehabtof transacting.
LAWYER BAsHhLE's TESTIMONY.
Lawyer William 2. Laselle was called to
| the stand and testified that Mr.. Newman
| had made two loans toa lady OF his acquain-
| tance secured by deeds of trust on her
| furniture. The property was not removed,
| however, aud is still in possession OF the
| lady. Witness testified that he knew
| Newman and knew that his business was
| to loan money on real and personailroperty.
License Clerk Montague was called and
produced book containing q record OF
licenses issued to- pawnhrokers. The wit
ness testified that he did not remember
any conversation with Mr.. Newman and
| did not remember TO have seen the appli-
cation. He said That Mr.. Newmans face
was familiar but he could not recall
having seen him. He was quite sure that
he had never led the defendant to believe
that a bankers license would suffice for
| pa wnbrokcrs business.
Mr Pugh rested the case for the gov
ernment at the conclusion of Mr.. Mon
ia gue's testimony, and Lawyer Fulton
proceeded to argue the law To the court. He
maintained that the law regulating pawn
brokerage did not affect his client, as the
business conducted by him was OF diff
ferent character entirely. he endeavored
to show by the deeds of trust and the
records of the auctioneer's books that
Newman did not have in his possession
| any personal property on which he had
made loans, except when such loans had
been defaulted.
MR.. PUGHS CONTENTION.
Mr. Pugh, following Mr.. Fulton, read
| the regulations regarding tie business of
| a pawnbroker in the District, and said
that the deed of trust implied possession
| simply allowing the original owner the
| use of the property. Under the provisions
| of the deed the property could not be
| disposed OF by the holder of the document
| until the expiration of the time set forth
| therein but the same conditions existed in
| a loan made by an ordinary pawnbroker
when he takes possession of the goods.
He maintained that the evidence show
| clearly that Newman took possession of
| the property on which loans were made
| In the case of the carriage which he removed
| from McDermotts, on receipt OF the firm
showing that it had been deposited there
for storage, the very fact that the de-
fendant had the receipt argued his posses
sion of the property.
At the conclusion Of Mr.. Pugh's argu'
ment Judge Scott stated that he would
| take the case under advisement and notify
| the parties concerned of his decision within
| a reasonable time.
S125 to Baltimore and Return S1.25
| via Il. d o. r. r.