The record-union., 1891-07-21
ferred to-.

Special to the REcoRD-UNIoN.
SAN FRANCISCO, July 20.-The suit OF
George III. Taylor against number Of
Legislators began before Judge Wallace
to-day. The courtroom was well filled
with local politicians and attorneys inter
ested in expected developments.
A. J. Clunie appeared for plaintiff and
Messrs. j. C. Campbell and Eugene Deu-
prey for the various defendants. Several
of these, including Senators w. III. Will
liams and Maher, were present. Messrs.
Burns, Crocker, Gage and others sub
penaed were not present.
The case was briefly stated by Mr..
Clunie as already published. The COM
plant sets forth that $4,000 is due Taylor
as balance due for services rendered in
partnership work at Sacramento during
the last session of the Legislature.
After stating the case counsel called L..
L. Bromwell.
L. L. BRoMwELL'S INTERVIEW WITH
BURNS.
L. L. Bromwell being sworn testified
that he was in the insurance business at
3lS California street. II know ID. NJ.
Burns, and have known him for twenty
years.
Mr.. Clunie asked if he had met Burns
between January lst and April 10th.
At this point Mr.. Campbell interposed
an objection to the testimony, on the
ground that this involved matter relating
10 an entirely new complaint and not that
originally filed.
The objection was oVerruled and an
other objection, made on slightly diff
ferent grounds, was similarly disposed OF.
Continuing, the witness said he had
met Burns two or three times for entirely
political purposes. Il went to him first
10 get him to withdraw his objection to
the appointment of Drew as Warden of
San Quentin
ibid you ever see Burns again?'
81 went to him to discuss the merits or
demerits of certain bills pending. / went
to him as | would to any friend who was
informed in political affairs.'
Mr.. Campbell objected to this line OF
questioning, because it was considering
Burns as an agent, and the agency had
not been shown.
Mr.. Clunie said that Burns was the
agent Of the political partnership, and
that the relevancy of all the testimony
would be seen and made connected, as it
legally should be.
Mr.. Deuprey contended that no sugges-
ton of Burns being an agent was made
IN the complaint. Counsel is now going
out on a bushwhacking expedition to see
what testimony they can find of value to
their cause.
The objection was overruled.
Speaking of insurance matters, con-
tinuing, witness said: II did not go to
Burns and talk insurance business. al
though | remember I was the one who
first spoke Of insurance. ! can't recall
what l said, but pointed out to him that
there We're many bills pending which
considered damaging to my business.
He promised to help me all he could.
Not name Of a single member Of the
Legislature was mentioned. No promise
was made by me to raise any money for
Burns, nor did l at any time pay any
money to him for any purpose. The only
money | paid toward Sacramento ex-
penses was a portion of a fee TO s. NJ
Shortridge, who represented the Pacific
Insurance Union in Sacramento. This
was the only money raised so far as |
know. | do not remember who this
money was paid to. 1t was paid by
check. My impression is was paid to the
General Manager of the Pacific Insurance
Union as part of our assessment
Counsel here asked for an order for wit
ness TO examine his check-boo to see to
whom the money was paid. He said he
expected TO show that So. 900 was paid to
ID. NJ. Burns.
Il have no idea," continued the wit
ness, "how much was paid at that time.
! know it was a portion-l-H l be-
leve-of fee of about 81 800 to Mr. Short
RIDGE Witness was here excused for a
time.
Senator Thomas Maher was the next
witness. Responding to questions he
testified: - know Banks, Williams.
Welch and other defendants in this
action. l met them continually in Sac
ramento. We met in room fifty-seyen at
the Capital Hotel as San Francisco dele
cation. L never attended a meeting
of Senators at the State House, nor did
/ meet with the delegation before it was
organized. / used TO meet Mr.. Burns
often, and met him in his room once or
twice"
'How often?"
"rwice."
"Sure of that9
eyes, sir--twicer
DO you remember the special occa-
sion?'
Il do. / went to him once when he was
Gick, and another time 1 went TO him for q
social VISIT
What do you mean by a social visit ?''
81 went 10 smoke a cigar"
81 don't think this is a proper line OF
questioning" protested MIR. Campbell
but the court told witness to proceed.
HIS VISITS TO BURNS.
did Mr.. Welch tell you to go and sec
Burns when he was sick ?''