Arizona republican., 1919-07-20
ASKS S25,0O0
 IN SUIT OVER
 RECENT ARREST
Mrs. H. c. Rurup Files Com plaint Against E. s. Pra- ther, Who Caused Her Arrest Here Recently

The hunter had become the hunted The huntress now is Mrs. Oleta Rurup and the quarry, E. $. Prather, head ana body of the Arrow Chemical company,
 who some time ago procured the arrest
 of Mrs. Rurup and her husband, Ii. e-
 Rurup on the charge of counterIeltlnS the brand and label of proprietary
 article known as bitro- phosphate The
 label used by Rurup bore the name i ''bicro- phosphate. OtherWlse tnele
 was no difference between the lapels l that would assail the eye.
 Soon after the arrest of the Rurups | on this charge Rurup was arrested on 1 A federal warrant charging a violation l of the food and drugs act. That matter
 is still pending. The original case went 1 to trial before Justice De SouZa, where | the case was dismissed as to Mrs
 Rurup. Rurup was found guilty, flneo,
 and appeal was taken.
 The greater part of the evidence was
 found in his own possession, among the 1 Dapers and articles found at the place
 of business of himself and wife and in the files of the telegraph and express
 offices where it appeared he had used his own and other names.
 Arrest Basis of Action
 The arrest of Mrs. Rurup is made the
 basis of her case against Prather. It
 was claimed the arrest was malicious evidence of which is found in the fact l if is alleged, that the arrest was timed
 to take place after o'clock at night I after the justices of the peace had left
 their offices. so that the plaintiff could
 not execute bail that day, obliging her
 therefore, to remain in jail all nlght.
 Further evidence of the unrelentlng
 disposition of Prather is alleged to be
 found in the following incident de-
 scribed in the complaint: Defendant
 sneeringly looked upon said plaintiff
 and took a glass of water, drank a sip from it and deliberately threw the re-
 mainder upon the feet and shoes Of the plaintiff, causing her shoes and hose to become wet and her feet to become soaked with water, in which condition she was forced to remain during the night" And that was not all: Said plaintiff lighted cigarette, took puff at same and deliberately turned around, facing the plaintiff, and blew puff of smoke in her face, much to her modification, discomfort and hu- initiation"
 Many Complains Set Forth Later the defendant returned, ac cording to the complaint, paraded back and forth in front of the plaintiff, look ing her over from head to foot and making grimaces with his face and his eyes contemptuously shrugging his shoulders, much to the discomfort of the plaintiff, thereby heaping insult 3 upon injury.
 The consequences of this ordeal are said by the complaint to have been the impairment of the plaintiffs health, the shattering of her nerves and great mentail anguish and bodily pain. A fur E ther cause of complaint is the effect of the arrest upon the business of the plaintiff as proprietor and manager of the Fashion Millinery store, which was E then doing a flourishing business [ which, following these alleged malic k ious acts of the defendant it is claimed in the complaint, has been impaired For all this the plaintiff asks damages in the amount of s25000. s10,000 ac- tual and $15,000 punitive.
 The Republican has a cause of con- plaint which is not set out in any ot the pleadings Some thousands of read CTS of this paper, according to the rec e ord kept in her mind, by the manager of The Republicans telephone ex- U change, called up to know what wa. meant by an attempted story of a pro | ceeding in court against the aforesaid \ Prather Nowhere was mentioned tn, !. name of tho conornlo i,1ont WhA------