The record-union., 1891-07-24
THE FAYL0R SUIT.
SEVERAL WITNESSES FAIL TO PUT
IN AN APPEARANCE.
Further Taking of Testimony in the
Case Postponed Until Next
Monday.
Special to the REcoRD-UNroN.

Special to the REcoRD-UNIoN.
SAN Francisco, July 23.-In the Fay
lor case this morning attorney Clunie
asked for weeks postponement. in or
der to give time to look up Richard Chute
and Henry Wangenheim, who were
wanted as witnesses but could not be
found.
stephen T. Gage, who had been sum-
moned, was also not present, and his
counsel stated that he had advised Gage
to pay no attention to the subpoena, rs it
had not been properly served.
The Court thereupon stated that the
warrant would hold good.
Attorney Clunie said he also desired to
have the State Librarian and his assistant
in attendance, as he wished to show by
them that the Finance Committee of the
combine met in the State Library every
day.
Attorney Campbell objected to con-
tinuance, and the Court finally adjourned
until 2 o'clock this afternoon, to enable
the plaintiff, if possible, to bring the wit
ness into the court.
At o'clock the trial was resumed.
Harvey 5. Brown again appeared in the
interests of Stephen Gage, and stated to
the court that he had made inquiries of
the clerk and had ascertained that no re-
turn had been made on the service. Such
Delng the case, ne asked to have the war
rant dismissed.
Mr.. Clunie then read an affidavit of
Deputy Sheriff Orndorff, in which he
stated that he had served the subpoena.
and MIR. Gage had asked as he reached the
door If there were any fees coming to
him, and he (Orndorff) replied that there
were not.
Charles b. Havens, of the Liverpool,
London and Globe Insurance Company,
was called as a witness. He was asked
by Clunie whether he had met with other
insurance men to discuss insurance legis-
lation.
Campbell objected and an argument en-
sued. The objection was overruled and
the answer was: II did not" He did not
know Burns or Chute.
Clunle asked him If he had ever talked
with Mr.. Broun, of Broun, Craig & Co.,
in regard to insurance legislation. He
said he might have done SO. He could
not remember.
He denied that he had ever paid any
money to influence legislation. The only
money he had paid was his share of the
Shortridge fee.
Campbell here made quite lengthy
speech, in which he said that Faylor
claimed $1,000 for three months work,
''as much," he said, .as your honor earns
that he was not employed in legitimate
business, and therefore had no cause of
action.
The court stated that there was nothing
in the pleadings TO show that the combi-
nation was formed for illegal purposes.
Therefore he could not anticipate.
Mr.. Havens then testified that there
was no money paid out except for the
Shortridge fee.
Robert Dickson, General Manager of
the insurance company, and a member of
the insurance Cnion, was next to testify.
He also denied all knowledge of a cor
ruption fund.
This composed all the witnesses in
court, and after an objection was sus-
tanned to Attorney Clunie's request that
the books of the Insurance Union be
brought into court, the latter pressed his
motion for a continuance for one week,
in order to hunt up missing witnesses
Taylor was recalled and questioned re-
garding his connection with the Califor-
ma Construction Company, and after
some other questions had been answered
the discussion went over, and the case
was continued until Monday.