The morning call., 1892-07-06
AGAINST BRUNER
Judge Wallace Will Try the Ex.
Assemblyman.
A Decision Rendered Yesterday BY Judge
Troutr in Which Reassignmsnt Of
Burners Case Is Denied

When Judge Trout orened court yester-
day morning Elwood Bruner. the Sacra-
mento politician, under Indictment for NAL
feasance in Office while he was acting as an
Assemblyman in the last Legislature, and
his attorney were present TO hear what de-
csion the court had arrived at as to Brun-
er's motion to have his case Transferred
from Judge Wallace's court.
They were disappointed. however. for
Judge Trout announced that he would not
render his decision until o'clock In the
afternoon.
AS soon as this announcement was made
Bruner and his attorney went to Judge
Wallace's court and there added another
chapter TO the case. which Is already be-
coming somewhat voluminous. by filing a
demurrer to the Indictment. Bruner took
this step to avoid being arraigned on the in
dictment. The demurrer was based on the
grounds that the court had no jurisdiction
over the offense charged, that it does not
substantially conform to the requirements
of sections $50. 951 and 952 Of the Penal
Code, that more than one cffeDse Is charged
and that the facts do not constitute public
offense.
Judge Wallace said he would hear argu-
ments Oh the demurrer next Friday at 10
A. NJ
Promptly at Q O'clock Judge Trout read
bis decision In the case. 1t was rather
long and covered all the phases of the case
as presented to him.
THE COURTS REASONS.
The main point in it was. of course, the
result, and that was unfavorable TO the pc
titioner. The grounds upon which this
action was taken were as follows:
First-That the efforts of Judge Wallace
as respondent in the aforesaid prohibition
proceedings were not inspired by any per-
"a IN ha 6efa hnt
we're merely intended TO convince the
higher court that his official action in ap-
pointing an elisor TO complete the Grand
Jury was authorized by the statute.
Second-That Judge Wallace has at no
time expressed any opinion as to ,ne guilt
or innocence of the defendant.
Third-Tnat Judge Wallace will not be
Influenced in the performance yf any of
his judicial duties by any interest he may
have taken or may continue to take in the
Citizens Defense Assocla alton.
Fourth-That any request on the part Of
Judge Wallace TO the end that the Sheriff
shall summon as trial jurors tor his depart
ment the same persons who had been sum-
moned by Elisor Hallidie was made with
good motive and without anY intention In
any manner 10 injnre the Defendant.
Fifth-That the defcn liant VIII have a fair
and impartial trial in Department 6 OF this
court
THE MOTION DENIED.
IN CONCLUSION Juuee Trout stated tnat h6
would remind the defendant that the Judge
in a criminal action has nothing to do with
determining the facts in case. His prov
ince is TO rule upon the admissibllity of the
evidence offered and 10 charge the jury as
10 the law which governs the case. Ii any
error is made by the court in any of these
particulars they can readily be remedied
by an appeal. With the question OF the
alleged disqualification Of the trial jurors in
Judge Wallace's court, Judge Trout said
be had nothing TO do.
The motion Of Bruner was therefore de-
MED and he must stand his trial before
Judge Wallace.