The Washington bee., 1899-03-25
DISCRIMINATION In THE
OURTS.
AFTER ADMITTING THE THEFT oI
JEwELRY SENTENCE IS SUSPENDED

AFTER ADMITTING THE THEFT OF
JEwELRY SENTENCE is SUSPENDED
Mrs. Annie Marie Norris presented
a pitiable appearance yesterday when
she appeared before Justice Bradley in
Criminal Court No. TO answer to tha
charge OF grand larceny. On account
OF her social position the announce
ment OF her arrest last fall for the theft
OF large quantity Of jewelry from
local Jewelry dealers was the talk of
the hour, especially when it became
known that the crime with which she
was charged consisted OF a series of
offences and the value of the articles
stolen amounted to about $1,000.
When Mrs. Norris was arraigned on
the charge she pleaded not guilty, but
Yesterday when called before Justice
Bradley she changed her plea to guilty
to the six indictments for grand larceny
which had been found against her by
the grand jury. She stood the irving
ordeal with remarkable fcrtitude until
her counsel Edwin B. Hay, referred to
the fact that she is mother. Then she
broke down and wept as if her heart
would break. MIR. Hay appealed to
the court for mercy and leniency for
the accused, explaining that all the
stolen property had been returned to
the owners and that they had also
stated that they had no desire to fur
ther prosecute the case, if the court
would consent to suspend sentence,
Justice Bradley then stated that he. |
too, had received letter from one oil
the dealers from whom a large GUAM
titY of the stolen property had been
taken in which he suggested that sem
tence be suspended. He also stated |
that letters had been received from the |
other dealers and from the pawn.
brokers with whom the articles had |
been pledged that they would be salts
he'd with suspension of sentence un-
der the circumstances. The strongest
appeal 10 hum he said, however, was
the fact that the accused is the mother
OF little child who needs her care.
Justice Bradley then consented to the
suspension of sentence and added thai
he hoped that there would never he
any occasion for having to impose if
later.
Since the disposition of the Annie
AsklnS case in the Police Court on last
w edneS lay it was generally believed
that Mrs. Norris would not go entirely
Tree. The AskinS woman was CHARGED
with similar offence, that Of shipfift.
ng. having stolen drygoods from sew
erai prominent local merchants. There
we're ten counts in the information filed \
against her, and on being found guilty. ,
'he was sentenced to pay fine of S27o
or go to jail for twenty-eight months. t
She was unable to pay the fine and {
vent down, leaving two children be- l
lind.
There was considerable comment in t
ourt circles yesterday after the decis-
OH had been rendered in the Norris
Voman's case, many persons express
ng themselves as surprised that one
ttender should go free while another
aid the full penalty Of the law and no o
Inference existed in the nature of the q
rimeS. Both women are mothers. L
he Askins woman was tried before a r
ldge of the Police Court and the o
'orris woman by a Justice of the Su- Il
RENE Court of the District a
fsfe, ,5-I4, go
There is no disposition on our +
art to critieise the courts, much A
IS the motlvewh prompts them; II
ut the cases above referred TO are u
} similar and the adjudication so III
ssimilar that the importance of y, "