Daily national Democrat., 1859-02-27
NO. a..
QalIg 9(atlonal 1ltmotrat.
The Millionaire and the Poor Shoemaker.

A queer case came before the Police Judge
of San Francisco, day or two ago. The
Alta gives the following account of it:
/ The chief case before tho Police Court. yes.
terday morning, was one in which Michael
Reese one of the richest men of the city, had
complained of John Doe Baker, poor shoe
maker, for obstructing the street by keeping
box on the sidewalk, where he mends boots
ana shoes. The suit was brought in the name
of the city.
John L. Durkee was called to the stand
and sworn. lie testified thus:
| know the defendant; he is a shoemaker,
he works in large dry goods box placed on
the outer edge of the sidewalk in California
street above Kearney the box is about four
feet and ha'f square am a policeman on
the 18th inst | served n notice on the defen.
dant that his box was an obstruction in the
street and must be removed within "a hours
the box had not been removed last evening !;
the complaint was made by Michael Reese.
Cross examination: The sidewalk there is
l3 feet inches wide there is a space of 8 f..
between the box and the houses do not
know how long defendant has occupied the
place; his business is mending boots and
shoes; | don't know whether he has q large
| family
George Hossefross, Street Superintendent
testified Complaint was made at my office
by Michael Reese that there was an o6struc-
ton Of box occupied by defendant on the
sidewalk on California street; served notice
on defendant; | have seen his box it is an
obstruction in the street; the sidewalk is l3
feet 10 inches wide; there is a space of nine
feet between the box and the houses; the de-
tendant has occupied the place for a year or
two.
Michael Reese, sworn know the position
of the box occupied by the defendant; it is on
California street, about 20 feet above Kear-
ney; it is large sized dry goods box; it is
an obstruction; the awning posts which
had to remove on Clay and Stockton and
hearney, and other streets, at a cost of 300
were not the hundredth part Of the obstruc.
tion that this box is.
Cross examination: l own property on all
the streets where had to remove awning
posts; the defendant has had his box in that
place for II year or more; ; | don't know whe-
ther he has been there two years; | live in
Washington street made complaint about
this obstruction on the 18th February was
notified by the Street Superintendent to re-
move my awning posts in the beginning of
the month; thought this box much great.
er obstruction than my awning posts
Q.-Didn't you make complaint out of spite
because Bakers dog whipped your dog2
A.-No, sir
Q.-Didn't you make complaint after
hight between your dog and his
A.-Ye es, sir
Odd you ever make complaint about
him before
A.-No, sir.
Odd you not tell him you would have
his box removed because his dog bit your
dog?
Al may have done so; | told him that
he ought to teach his dog better manners,
and that he ought to take his box from the
sidewalk his dog is small, mine is pup five
months old; | have complained of other OBJ
structions in the street among others, about
distractions in front Of mill on First street,
and in front of house on Battery st., where
| own property; | don't own any property
near the box of defendant. His obstruction
don't interfere with my property.
Here the prosecution closed their case
John Fitzpatrick, the only witness allowed
for the defense, testified:
| know defendant; his box is in front ofmy
shop; he has occupied the lace four years
he has wife and five children; he has no
means of support except the business he does
in that box
Judge Coon said the box was undoubted-
y an obstruction in the eye of the law, and
the sentence would be that defendant would
be fined $40, (tho lowest fine permitted by the
order) but execution would be stayed and
would not issue if the box were removed
within five days 1t seemed to be under
stood that if removed within that time the
fine would not be collected
So ends the war between the millionaire
and the poor shoemaker.