The Washington times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1902-1939, 1903-10-20
PICTURE FRAME AGENT
HAILED INTO COURT
Portrait of Boy May Have
Been Tempered With.
SPOTS ON FACE OF THE LAD
Woman Asked for Warrant for Scamp
Whom She Declares Sought
Revenge.
SPOTS ON FACE OF THE LAD

ST. LOUIS. oct. 20.-Picture and pic
ture frame selling agents. against whom
many complaints of petty swindles were
recently charged in the East, are now
laboring I'm this city and seeking whom
they may force into buying their wares
The game is so old. and so much pub
LEFTY has been given OF the modus
operandi OF the swindlers, that they go
from pillar to post into new fields.
The game worked by these so-called
selling agents is to obtain an order for
the enlargement of photo into a crayon
or water color portrait at a reasonable
price. They deliver the work of art 90
in a gilt frame and harangue customer
until they either sell the frame with the
picture or are forced to leave. They are
so insolent when one refuses TO buy the
frame at twice its worth, Chat in many
instances they refuse 20 deliver either
the original photo or crayon portrait.
and not a few have been sent TO jail in
Eastern towns and cities.
Asked for Warrant.
Mrs. Annie Hoppe. of Finney Avenue.
applied for a warrant Wednesday morn
ing against an artist named Wright, OF
Sarah Street. Mrs Hoppe told Assist
ing Prosecuting Attorney Dalton that
Wright had destroyed portrait he had
painted OF her son by a very ingenious
method for revenge because she would
not purchase a frame TO go with the
picture. Mr.. Dalton said he would write
TO Wright to come to his Office and eX-
plain the mysterious destruction OF
picture which has been ont of his hands
for several weeks.
Mrs. Hoppe commissioned Wright TO
paint a portrait of her son. and paid
him SIG therefor she says.
Portrait All Right.
When the picture was finished Mrs.
Hoppe inspected II. and pronounced IL
satisfactory. Wright Mrs. Hoppe says.
tried TO sell her a heavy gilt frame to
20 with It. but she thought the price
excessive. she declares. and refused 10
buy Il. Wright. according TO Mrs.
Hoppe. was annoyed at this.
But in due time the portrait was de-
ivered and set up In Mrs. Hopes par
Tor. where it vas much admired.
\ few days ago spots began 20 appear
on the face Of the boy IN the portrait
They resembled smallpox pustules OF
the first day The next day the boy
apparently. had a very bad case. and
some Of Mrs Hopes friends facetious-
~ suggested that the picture be quar-
antined
Hard TO Tell.
when Mrs. Hopes came down stairs
one morning the eruption had spread SC
that she could not tell whether the
picture was a portrait Of her son. a
landscape. or a battle scene I'm Manila
Bay
Upon examining the canvas she found
piece OF paper pasted on the back
When she removed this she found that
several spots OF oil or some other sub
stance had been placed upon the can
vas. which evidently had the effect OF
destroying the painted surface. by first
making blotches on the face. which
ran into generally notified com
plexion. and finally turned an i'm.
pressionistic smear.
Mrs. Hoppe wants Mr. Wright 10 re
turn the money she paid for H. OF
make q new portrait without the spot.
on the back Of II.