The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1891-12-24
SAN FRANCISCO GRAND JURY.
FINAL REPORT PRESENTED TO
THE COURT.
Remarks of Judge Wallace Prior to
Making an Order Discharging
Them From Duty.
Special 10 the REcoRD-US1oS.

Special 10 the RECoRD-UNIoN.
SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 23.-The Grand
Jury to-day handed in its final report.
After the report was filed Judge Wallace
proceeded TO deliver a lengthy address to
the jurors prior to discharging them. lie
referred to the fact that the decision of
the Supreme Court in the Bruner case
operated to stop the jurors from further
Investigations of causes which make the
cost Of government fall more heavily
upon the poor man than on the rich
Judge Wallace reviewed the various
steps that had led to the appointment of
II. Il. Scott as an elisor.
He referred to the Supreme Court de-
cision as remarkable decision" in
that it held that an elisor could not be ap-
pointed unless there was an affidavit of
the disqualification of Sheriff and Cor
Oner.
A very great part of Judge Wallaces
address was most exhaustive exposition
Of the law relating to the formation of
Grand Juries, and was an analysis of the
Supreme Courts decision, taking the
ground, of course, that the Supreme Court
had not made a sound decision. In fact,
according to Judge Wallace, the decision
had been rendered in open defiance of the
Civil and Political Codes.
He cOntended that 1.-The first and fiInda-
mental error in the Bruner decision" was
the assertion that the codes must be read
together.
Judge Wallace also sarcastically re-
ferred to the comments of the Supreme
Court as to the definition of an elisOr.
Judge Wallace asserted that the Sheriff
and Coroner were clearly disqualified,
because their offices were to be investi-
gated.
VI vi i |.
OF the Supreme Court as to the necessity
of an affidavit of the Sherif17s disqualif-
cation as purely fanciful."
Judge Wallace spoke of the prevailing
opinion of the Supreme Court as 1.-The
deliberately constructed argument OF
Justice Mcfarland"
Judge Wallace declared that in all the
steps leading up to the formation of the
Grand Jury he has spared no research or
anxious desire in looking up the law, and
he was sure nothing had been done in
any way illegal. He declared that there
was no warrant in common law for the
Bruner decision.
Referring TO the decision in the South
we'll case by the Supreme Court when
Judge Wallace was on that bench. Judge
Wallace said that decision was often
quoted and more often misunderstood.
Referring to the Bruner decision, Judge
Wallace said that the Supreme Court
while declaring in effect that there was
not reversible error in the impaneling
Of the Grand Jury, find there was an error
amounting to a total lack of jurisdiction.
Returning to the Southwell case, Judge
Wallace sarcastically remarked that
Hall McAllister, who was Southwelps
counsel, was always wont to bring 10 the
study ofevery great case aSsiduity, learn
ing and ability and yet he appears 10 have
overlooked point that might have
al anr 1E n oil II L. - =
for writ OF prohibition, which the Su-
preme Court now says would have been
proper remedy.
Then with irony Judge Wallace ex-
pressed q wonder as to how many persons
are now in prison who could have been
saved if their counsel had only known of
the writ of prohibition.
The decision in the case of Edgar Hay-
moDd, declaring that the Grand jury was
a de tacto Grand Jury, and the Bruner
decision were compart1, aIss declared to
be inconsistent.
Judge Wallace emphaticaIly assorted
that the power appointing an elisor was
not one-man order.
He said that if at any time majority of
the Superior Court Judges had objected
to the appointment of the elisor he would
not have proceeded in that way to organ
iZe the jury. He spoke of the office of
Presiding Judge as but a part of the peo-
pies power.
AS to the comments of the Supreme
Court on possible abuse of power by a
dishonest Judge in appointing an elIsor.
Judge Wallace evidently did not relish
them, for he, with unmistakable scorn,
intimated that the Supreme Court, when
not so distinguished as at present for
learning, ability and integrity, might be
guilty of an abuse of power.
New York decisions and others were
oif nA tod
able length.
Some one has Numbered" said Judge
Wallace; ''some one has made mistake.''
He ventured to say that he had not blum
dered. Justice" said he, ''has been de-
feated. The investigation of grave abuses
has been stopped" He felt that he had a
right to and had shown that he had not
made any mistake.
The court then complimented the Jurors
on the work they had done, and then
made an order discharging them from
further duty.