Evening journal., 1910-01-11
COURT HEARS
THE LUFF CASE
Man Charged With Attempting
to Obtain Money Under
False PretenSe

Eugene W. Luff was placed on trial in
the Court Of General Sessions yesterday
afternoon on the charge OF attempting to
obtain money under false pretenses
Deputy Attorney-General wolcott In his
opening address 70 the jury said Luff In
sured his furniture IN a burglary insur-
ance company. This was on May 1, last
year and three weeks later he made a
claim for 81, la5 for loss OF furniture from
his home IN Brandywine hundred. Among
the articles stolen, according 70 the claim.
we're a purse OF s1.lb0 and two oil paint
ings. These Mr.. wolcott said were re-
covered IN an autbuilding on tho Luff
property.
Alfred Bird. Of the Ford. Bird and Com
pan testified to the issue OF burglary
policy for $4,000 TO Luif. Luff later applied
for compensation for his loss and made a
statement regarding a burglary at his
house According to the state this state
ment was sworn 70 before John F. Neary.
Detective Gillis testified 10 making the
Investigation and Of having heard state
ments by Lun regarding his loss Of si.i5C
/ IN cash.
other witnesses examined during the AZ.
ternoon were Edward #. Meehan. chief
Inspector Of the bonding company, Charles
]. Danaheur.
James p. Ratiedge was the nrst witness
called In the case this morning. Rauedgs
testified that Luff last May told Detectiv,
Gnis IA his presence regarding the burg
larry at the bun residence. Witness sal,
Lun had said that he got tne money whiol
he said he had been robbed OF by "Don
aldo" horse. winning a race az 30 10 /
According 20 Mr.. Ratiedge Lun said hl
had put up $50 and had won an additona
$1,000. Luf later told Ratledge according
to the testimony that he had told Inspect
or Meehan that he had got the none,
from man named Bean. Of Philadelphia
Witness said that on the following da,
he and Detective Gnlis recovered In q
shed near the house two oil paintings re
ported 70 have been stolen from Lum'l
residence. Ratledge Identified the pictures
produced I'm court as the ones recovered
In the she'd
In cross-examination he said he was
private detective and accompanied De.
tective Gflls in the investigation but wa,
not paid for his services. Ho has not beer
promised payment. Ho described IN,
marks on the window where entrance {,
the house had been made. The drawel
from which the money had been taker
was scratched.
Detective Harry ellis testified regard
ing a conversation he had with Luf and
wrote It down and after reading IL ovei
to Luf the latter said It was true
The statement was offered IN evidence
bait was objected TO by Mr.. Handy whC
with Howell S. England represents Luf
and the court sustained the objection. De
tective Gillis further testified to state
ments made to him by Lun.
The pictures were then offered II
evidence but Mr.. Handy objected OF
the ground that the pictures stolef
we're oil paintings and these wer,
common chromos. Later he withdrew
the objection and they went in. Mr.
Handy added he was not sorry thai
the detectives had not recovered tn,
money, gold watch and diamond pin
In cross examination Mr.. Hand,
asked Detective Gillis what he hat
done IN fastening the burglary on am
one else except Eugene Luff. Mr.. Gil.
lis replied that he could not get {
line on any one else but Luff."
, Albert Bird Of the insurance com.
pany who testified yesterday. was tn,
next witness and said Luff had called
Continued on Second Page.