New Britain herald., 1916-02-12
SAM TARSKI FINED
 $50; IS REARRESTED
PaWnbr0ker to Face Another Charge in Police Court Monday

Sam Tarski, until January 6 a
 pa paWnbroIer on Lafayette street, was
 found guilty and fined $50 and costs
 by Judge John H. Kirkham in police
 court this morning for taking a dia-
 mond ring left in his charge without
 giving the owner an opportunity to
 redeem it within the six months re-
 Quired by law. Immediately after
 sentence had been pronounced Prose-
 cutor George w. Klett had Tarskl re-
 arrested on another warrant, charging
 him with a similar offense against an-
 other complainant. Tarski was de- Tended by Lawyer Morris D. SaXe.
 It was charged by the state that on
 May P Tony Demarco pawned a
 watch and chain and diamond ring
 for $65. He claimed that the ring
 was worth over s110 and testified
 that Tarsl1i had offered him that
 amount for it. although he put the
 value in Tarski's account book as $l5.
 On November 22 the pledge was re- newed Last Sunday Demarco visited
 police headquarters and complained 10 Detective Bamforth that he had
 tried to redeem his watch, chain and diamond on three or four different occasions and that finally Tarski had
 offered him $3O and explained that he did not have the ring. The police communicated with Tarski and he save pawn check which, he said, if presented at the State Loan company in Hartford would entitle him to re- deem his valuables as he had left them there. Demarco went to the Hartford loan office and was informed that Tarski had taken the articles out ten days or two weeks before Sergeant Bamforth gave the same tes- timony. Frank Maietta also cor roborated this testimony and said that although he had been appointed De- marcos agent to redeem the pledges he had been unable to get satisfaction from Tarski
 Sake Claims a HOld-up.
 Lawyer Saxe declared that the case was a "hold-up" on the part of DemarcO. He said that he had talked with his friends. and they had ad- vised him that if he could not get hack his valuables he could make Tarski pay heavy damages. Hence the case was a "hold-up."
 Tarski denied any irregular deal- ings. He said that the jewelry was pawned at his place on May 22. On the following day, he said, he had the diamond in his pocket and lost it. All efforts to recover it failed. He said that he issued the new ticket for the on November p because at l that time "he was not ready to tell | the owner that he had lost it. Tar 1 ski, however, asserted that he was ! ready and anxious to make reason 1 able cash settlement with Demarco. | He said that he had offered to give l Demarco back his watch and chain, l which were valued at $65, and an ad- l litional $1O which would be equal to | he $75 which Demarco placed in his ! cook as the value of the ring. This 1 ,ffer had been refused. He then said rat Demarco told him he had sold ,is ticket for s25, whereupon Tarski | ;ffered him $30 in settlement. Dur ng the cross examination by Prose- uting Attorney Klett, Tarski proved , contradicting witness and on several occasions became badly confused. Ie said at one time that after he lost he ring he told DemarcO that he lad forgot that he had left some of lis articles at loan company and it night be there" Sergeant BamfOrth ,lso denied that Tarski ever made cveral statements to him that on the stand the accused had testified to making.
 In summing up the case Prosecutor |<lett scored Tarski severely. He 1welt long upon the fact that Tarski had once offered Demarco s110 for 1is ring and then had 'lost it. after loaning $75 on it. He intimated that the pawnbroker might have disposed of the S11O ring for a good price elsewhere and declared that there must be some reason for the mys- terlous loss of this ring Lawyer Sake insisted that it was entirely within the realm of possibilities to lose a diamond ring, to which the prosecutor replied: "Of course it is possible to lose a diamond ring so."
 Lawyer Sake insisted that De- marco had been falsifying on the stand and had probably been in formed of the law which permits a party injured as he had been to re- cover treble costs for his lost article hence the boost in the value from S75 to $110. He told the court that Tarsl1i had been telling the truth. He had lost the ring and was willing to make a fair settlement for cash.
 To Face Another Charge.
 After Tarslxi was fined $50 and 1 costs, bonds were fixed at $500 for an appeal. While the accused was wait ing for a bondsman,l Prosecutor Klett lad him re-arrested on a second The complainant in this case is R. M. Hause who claims that 1 on January 1, five days before Tarski went out of business, he pawned a ring set with two diamonds and a and had tired to redeem it but had been informed that Tarski did not have it but had himself 1 pawned it elsewhere. He will be fried Monday