The morning call., 1890-11-12
Accusations Of Malfeasancs in Gffi,e Net sus-
taiaed-Lowenthal Threatened
by defendant.

Did you ever knock man down on the
street and take his coat?''
NO, no, no. | object to insulting ques-
lions Of that kind"
Il shall hold that you have no right to
continue that line of Interrogation" re-
marked the Court.
I'VE are prepared 10 prove by a reputable
witness the truth of what l say" added Mr..
Neil>on, hotly.
.You can't do it," was the equally warm
rejoinder of Judge Murphy.
do you remember that man named
William Mitchell was indicted for murder
while you we're District Attorney" asked
the inquis tor.
Yes"
Did you bring him to justice? Was he
ever tried ?"
81 don't know that he was. I don't re-
member"
Bert McNulty clerk Of Judge Murphy's
court, was called on 10 produce the record of
the case. 1t showed that there were a mum
Der Of continuanceS, and that the case was
never tried The witness said he did not
know why there was no trial. He denied
that Mitchell was taken out of jail to vote
-. for him. or that fifty other prisoners were
temporarily released for tie same purpose;
SAID he never reeo mmrnded Officer Maroney
fur promotion to compensate him for serv-
Ices in voting County Jail prisoners.
g. TIBBEY's DEFECTIVE INDICTMENT.
The case of Il. 5. Tibbey, formerly Secre-
p tary of the DupOnt-StIeet Widening Commits
sion, was called to Judge Murphy'S atteE-
ton. He remembered that Iibbey was ac-
c,ised VI embezzlIng a large amount of
money, and was indicted; reeollected that
the court sustained a demurrer to the in
Ciictment, but could not recall the grounds
Of the demurrer; Tibbey was not punished.
DO you remember meeting with TIbbey,
Captain Lees, Maynard and Bryant one
nght?" asked MIR. Nelson.
No, sir was the reply.
"Y GU don't? Now, isn't it a fact that you
and the others | have mentioned did meet,
and that you. as District Attorney, arranged
to bring in a defective Indictment which
would be knocked out by the court?''
That is not true. The suggestion is in
famous"
Judge Murphy said he remembered the
case of Miller, Secretary of the Central
Pacific Contract and Finance Company, and
recalled the fact that the public press re-
ported Miller TO be held prisoner in the
railroad building, at the corner of Fourth
and Townsend streets in this city, until he
paid back money that he had taken from
his employers. He did not present the mat
ter to the Grand Jury. because he did not
consider it to be the duty of The District At
tOruey to be a public accuser. He said
General W. II. L. Barnes did not do any
thing in favor of Miller at that time.
ABOUT sTow's INFLUENCE.
Ibid not ". W. Stow influence you to
keep your hands off Miller" was asked.
''NU, sir"
Has he not supported you for office ever
since as compensation for your services
then ?"
NO, SIR
Ibid you not consult with Senator Stan
ford and the late Mr. Croker in regard to
the Miller case?'
No, sir"
Judge Murphy testified that his house, in
which he lives, cost him $500; that he paid
for IL on the installment plan, taking nine
years and six months to complete the pur-
chase, and denied that AlvinZa hayward or
\. II. Rose helped him TO get the money Or
supervised the building of the house. He
borrowed the money from the Pacific Build
ing aud Loan Association.
At O'Clock recess was taken until
o clock in the evening.
Evening Session.
After the recess Mr.. Nelson produced a
paper which be intimated had been written
by ex-District Attorney J. D. Sullivan and
replied TO by Judge Murphy. lie wanted to
have Mr.. Sullivan brought into court to be
questioned, and it was ordered that Mr.. Sui
liyan be present at the next session Of the
court.
Clarence Gray, who is acting as Mr.. Neil
sons consulting attorney, asked why Mr..
Sulli van had failed to respond when sub
penaed.
Because it would ruin him to admit what
this paper contains" replied Mr.. Nelson,
who refused to show the paper to Judge
Murphy or 10 that gentleman's attorney. 3.
c. Darwin. He said it should never be made
public until he could put it in Mr.. Sullivan S
hands.
CAPTAIN LEES TEsTIFIEs.
Captain l. W. Lees was introduced as
witness. He said he had no papers or docu-
ments relating TO the Indictment of III. 5.
Tibbey, formerly Secretary Of the Dupont
street Widening Commission. charged with
forgery and emDezzlenent. The only thing
in his possession was pamphlet Of 100
pages, written by himself, exposing Tib-
'Dey's frauds.
Captain Lees did not remember having
talked with Judge Murphy about that mat
ter. The pamphlet was written before the
indictment
- Do you remember what was done with
the case against Tibbey?" asked Mt. Neil
son.
at was knocked out by the Supreme
Court The Supreme Court denied that the
documents which he was said to have SimU-
lated or over issued were not legally sub
Jeet of forgery. As there was no legal
ground for the prosecution the cases failed
and Tibbey was not punished"
Judge Murphy was called and asked why
1ibbey was not prosecuted. The witness
replied that IiDbey was prosecuted with al
the vigor within the power of the District
Attorneys Office, ex-Judge Darwin being
the deputy who had the case in charge. AS
the Supreme Court had declared that there
was no law under which the prosecution
could be made OF course no conviction could
be secured.
At this point Mr.. Nelson appealed to the
Court to be excused from proceeding, saying
that he was suffering from vertigo.
BOTH SICK.
Judge JoaehImsen said he was as sick as
the questioner and that the press of public
business made it necessary to go ahead.
Mr.. Nelson said he never heard OF such a
thing before in the history of Jurisprudence.
Bert McNulty was called and produced the
original indictments in the cases against
TiDbey and Haskill, to be hereafter c0nsid-
cred.
Mr.. McNulty was asked to produce the
records OF the court in the case OF Chun Kit,
charged with murder. Mr.. Nelson charged
that there We're numerous delays and ill.,
applicable continuaDces in this case.
squabble arose with regard to the
method of examining the record. Mr.. Neil
son wanted it scrutinized page by page.
Mr. Darwin objected, and the Court de-
cided that the index should be consulted to
determine what was done in the case
1t was shown that Chun Kits first appear
aDce in court was November 6, 1856, and
that April 10, 1887. verdict Of not guilty
was given by the jury.
Mr.. Darwin and several other lawyers
present thought 1t was very quick trial.
Mr., Nelson said there was another in
dictment
RUMPUs.
THAT is a mistake" said Fl. II. Lowen-
thai, who defended Chun Kit
Mr. Nelson glared savagely at Mr.
LOwenthal and shouted: If that gentle
man says anything more that L can't hear it
Will not be well for HIM."
The Court compelled peace by directing
Mr.. Lowenthai to sit down and ordering
Mr.. Nelson to desist from making such re-
marks.
Mr.. Nelson's infrmity Of defective hear
ing caused many delays and several misun-
derstandmgs.
There was slight diversion at one time
when Mr.. Nelson, in an updertone, said ::
These things may seem dull and dry to
your Honor, but they are pertinent to my
defense"
"What's that?' Numbered the Court.