The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1891-10-03
STEVE CAGES PLEA.
He Says He Eyaded the Grand
Jury in Good Faith.
Judge Wallace Continues His Trial to Enable
the Supreme Court to Decide the
Grand Jury Question.

Since Judge Murphy's decision in the
Chute case was rendered, the one theme
among boodlerS and honest citizens alike
has been the probable action Of Judge Wal
lace in regard to Stephen T. Gage, who was
cited to appear in Department 6 yesterday
morning and show cause why he should not
be sdjudged guilty of contempt Tor neglect
ing to regard the summons of the Grand
Jury.
AT 10 O'Clock yesterday Judge Wallace's
courtroom was packed with a crowd of
attorneys, reputable and otherwise, many
prominent cit zens from business circles and
the horde of professional politicians who
have been following Grand Jury matters,
and the cases arising hereunder, with an
interest which has continued undated dur
ing the past few weeks.
Greed Havmond was on hand bright and
early, his entrance being closely followed
by that Of C. Ben Darwin. Attorney-Gen-
eral W. II. Hart took a seat at the counsel
table beside District Attorney w. III.
Barnes. Benjamin Morgan occupied an ad
joining chair, although no one seemed to
know in what capacity he appeared.
STEPHEN, THE MARTYR.
"I don't see Stephen, the martyr" said
General Barnes, glancing around the court
room. A few minutes before the hour for
opening court, however, Gage entered with
deputy sheriff and sat down behind his
counsel Almost simultaneously Judge
Wallace came in from his chambers, look
ing calm and unruttled.
On his way to the bench he was stopped
by Greed Raymond, who extended his hand
and inquired how his Honor felt. L mean
judicially," he added.
Now comes the tug Of war;" said Ger
eral Barnes in an audible whisper; 'four5
beat king full"
AS soon as the Judge was seated Greed
Raymond arose and said that he desired to
make statement to the Court in advance.
He appeared for Gage and wished to assure
the Court that both attorney and client
were acting in good faith. While under the
present question regarding the validity of
the Grand Jury there might be technical
contempt, he stated that the sole object of
his client was his effort as private citizen
to obtain an authoritative decision as to the
standing OF the case.
Continuing the Southern Pacific Attorney
General said that he had great respect for
Judge Wallace's opinion in civil matters,
but that he believed he had little experience
in criminal law. AS the Supreme Court
would not hear Il habeas corpus petition un-
til the Superior Court had first passed upon
1t adversely, he asked in view Of its i'm
portance that the whole matter be heard and
decided at once He waived all technical
objections and filed the following questions: {:
QUESTIONS FILED.
l. Whether under the law and rules of
this court has the Judge the authority to or
der the Sheriff or any other person to sum-
mon from the body of the county persons to
complete Grand Jury while there still re-
mains in the Grand Jury box of the county
more than 100 names of competent persons
selected to serve during the pending year as
grand jurors?
9. Had the Judge of this court authority
under the facts OF this case to appoint an
elisOr?
3. If either of the foregoing questions are
answered in the negative, then whether the
invalid act or omission went to the sub
stance of the Grand Jury, and whether its
| proceedings when properly attacked would
or would not be invalid and necessarily set
| aside?
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL.
Attorney General Hart also addressed the
| Court, explaining that as the question OF the
| power aud validity of tue Grand Jury af-
| fected the Whole State, he desired 70 take a