Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1896-05-01
LOTTIE TILFORD.
The Defendant Sentenced to Twenty
Days in Jail.


The Lottie Tilford disreputable house
case came up before Judge Miller this
afternoon on a motion of the government
that the court impose sentence.
Lawyer Edwin Forrest for the defend
ant called the case to the attention of the
court. and recalled the fact that the jury
In returning verdict Of guilty recon-
mended his client to the mercy OF the
court.
In addressing the court he mentioned the
other cases tried. One woman. he said,
was convicted. the other was acquitted,
and he thought the last woman should not
be sent to jail when the others had escap-
ed Imprisonment.
Counsel dwelt upon the fact that the
jury had recommended mercy, and this he
thought should relieve her Of jail sem
tence.
Judge Miller In speaking OF the case said
that this case had been twice tried. When
the first trial was had the jury disagreed,
and the judge said IT was hardly neces-
sary for him to say that he disagreed with
the jury. Further he had nothing to say
about that trial.
Continuing, the Judge said he would i'm
pose a sentence in this case such as he
had intmated at a former hearing. So far
as the court is concerned, II has nothlng
to do with the question Of social evil. II is
of a class of cases in which the Of
Tense is continual, and one which Is de-
nominated under the common law as
nuisance. The imposition Of fine, the
court thought, would amount to nothing
more than the imposition Of a license tax.
The object of the law in imposing punish
ment is to deter others and not to have a
division of the funds between the defen-
dant and the government.
Judge Miller said he was free to say that
there were no aggravating points in this
case, such as unusual disorders or rob-
berries. There We're women in the house,
af how inn hn
met men there and who did not want her
parents to know where she was.
Counsel for the defendant said that his
client was only one out of many who lived
and kept house in the section where the
authorities have virtually permitted them
to be conducted, not molesting them with
out some special cause. If there was any
desire the part of the authorities to
been general he would not ask the court
to impose only fine. He thought his
client should not be made to suffer for
what others had done.
In conclusion the court said that the
recommendation of the jury should not be
wholly disregarded. The court could not
conceive that the authorities had any mo-
tive in allowing these places to be con-
Quoted In violation of law. In considera-
ton Of the jurys recommendation he
would make the Imprisonment much
smaller than he would otherwise have
made It
a sentence of twenty days in jail and
fine of $50 was imposed.
When sentence had been passed the
woman did not faint or become hysterical,
but she took her sentence philosophically,
and concluded TO make the best of it. She
was not hustled down stairs and put In
cell with the other prisoners, but was
treated with every consideration by the
court officers. A carriage was waiting out
side for her, and she was driven TO the
Division" in charge Of officer, in order
that she might tell the girls goodbye and
arrange business matters. She was after
ward driven to Jail.