The morning call., 1892-06-24
SQUIRGS ON TRIAL.
Testimony Taken Against the
Alleged Jury-Fixer.
Attorneys Chickering and Smith Tell in
Court How squires offered to CON-
NIT Embraeery for Coin.

In Judge Murphy's court yesterday the
trial of John Fl. Squires charged with en-
braeery, was taken up. Squires was trial
juror in Judge Sanderson's court, and it is
alleged made an effort to SIX" the jury in
the case of All Fook vs.. Wo Yin Wan ct
ais, by approaching the attorneys for the
defendants and telling them that he could
secure verdict in their favor if they would
give him $500.
Instead Of paying him the money the at
torneys LED him on to commit himself aud
then they informed Judge Sanderson. The
latter took such steps that Squires was in
dieted by the Grand Jury.
When the case was called yesterday the
courtroom was crowded with spectators.
Squires was accompanied by his wife and
little adopted daughter, who was formerly
Alice Decio, the grandchid OF Mrs. d. A.
Philips. Since Squires has got into this
trouble Mrs. Phillips has taken steps TO
have the adoption papers revoked.
throughout yesterdays proceedings
Squires was calm and cool, and did not seem
in the least worried about his predicament.
His wife, on the contrary, looked weary
and careworn.
The morning session was taken up in en-
deavoring to get a jury. Contrary to g X
spectatlon this was not a difficult matter.
There was no particular outline OF defense
developed In the questions asked the tales
men, Inc principal point that was made
being mat vi prejudice against the prisoner.
A JURY SECURED.
Early in the afternoon the complete jury
was secured, as follows: Michael Lawler,
Joseph SOphey, S. IL. Nelson, ID. Bernardo,
Charles S. Bartlett, L. NJ. Block, John H.
Burnham, r. Barbieri, Charles Nuremberg,
August Buislay, E. j. Van Slyke and 5. t.
Alderman.
The first witness called was d. j. Crow.
Icy, clerk of Judge SandersOn's court, who
Identified Squlres as one oil the jurors who lie
had sworn IN to try the case oil All FoOk VS.
Wo I IN Wan. de also identified the rec
ords OF the court concerning the case.
William ii. Chickering who was one Of
the attorneys In the FOOk case who was ap-
preached by Squires was then called and
started IN TO relate all the circumstances
connected with his meeting with Squires
His testimony was that on the 9th Of this
month he was approached by SquTes on
McAllister street, near Market, AMI the lat
ter at once began talking about the case.
tie said be controlled five or six Of the jury
men and thought he could fix them for SIS
or 500 apiece. The witness told Squires
that D. f. Smith was the senior counsel in
the case and that Squires had better see
him. Squres said that he had heard that
the other side was trying to work the jury
and that the defense ought TO do some
thing. lie could arrange it.
What did you do?' WAS asked the wit
ness.
Il laid trap for him and he fell into It,
l had advised Judge Sanderson that night
what l had done and lie was cOgniZant Of
It, Aiterward witness visited SQuires at
his store. 1912 Turk street. and got him to
commit himself still further regarding the
fixing Of the jury. Witness did not report
the matter TO the Chief of Police as he
thought he had done his duty in informing
Judge Sanders0n of the matter.
HE WANTED $500.
did you ofteT Squires s50OP
II asked him if $500 would fix the case
and he finally agreed that il would. He
wanted the money TO take into the jury-roum
where he said he could use it,"
MIR. Chckering was crOss-eXamined by
Attorney WhaIey, who is defending Squires,
but his testimony was not shaken under the
fire of questions.
Attorney James f. Smith, who was also
approached by SquireS, was the next wit
ness, and be repeated in substance what has
already been published as his statement in
the case. Squires was very careful in his
interviews, Smith said,Ithat there should
not be third party present. He offered to
arrange matters so that the jury would re-
turn verdict for the defendants for $780,
He was sure ha could control four or five