The morning call., 1892-05-24

did not know about Mr.. Burners opera
tions in connection with the intro duction
and defeat Of the scalpers' bill.
Before he called these onorabl5 members
Of the Assembly Mr.. Reddy said he desired
TO show by them that Mr.. Bruner had never
c0nversed with any of them in regard to
Assembly bill 7G6. The measure to defeat
which it is alleged Bruner sought to gather
in $500 from the American Ticket brokers
Association
A QUESTION OF PRECISION.
Hon. II. c. Dibble was the first to be
sworn. Lawyer Reddy sat up in his seat
very straight as he beamed upon the hero
of the waste-paper basket episode, and
said:
"Were you member. Mr.. Dibble, Of the
last Legislature 2"
Mr.. Dibble looked at the top of his walk
ing-stck, and, rejecting a second on the
need of precision in his statements under
oath, answered in an Informing spirit, Il
am a member OF the present Legislature.
II mean" said Mr.. Reddy, correcting
himself, 'aTe you member OF the Legls-
lature, and we're you present at the last se5-
sion Of that bOdy?"
Il am member Of the Legislature. and
was present at the last session, answered
the witness.
The Judge did not allow this first oppor-
tunIty of the morning for a judicial Joke
to escape unimproved, for with tw nkl3
in his eyes he turned toward Mr.. Dlbb
and said, "Do you mean, Mr.. Dibble.
that you are "a member Of the Legislature
here present.?
This reference TO the large attendance as
witnesses In the case OF the popular branch
of the Legislature caused a hearty laugh, in
which Mr.. Dibble joined.
Mr. Reddy then began TO ask the witness
whether he had attended any meetings of
itn In mil WI no
BruneT had approached him at any time
during the session in regard to his vote IN
the committee upon the scalpers' bill.
Barclay Henley, who represents the Ciu-
ZenS' Defense Association in the prosecution
Of Mr. Bruner, objected to the questions as
irrelevant and immaterial, but Judge Coifey
though il best TO allow them.
Mr.. Dibble answered that Mi BrunPT had
never spoken to him about the bill, but eX-
planned further that he had given very little
Of his time to the Judiciary Committee,
especially during the last three weeks Of
the session. He was chairman Of the Ways
and Means Committee and had charge Of the
appoTtIOument bills. These duties absorbed
most of his time. The scalpers' bill never
came before the judiciary Committee when
L was present, added the witness.
TEE RANK OF COMMITTEES.
Mr.. Reddy asked him whether the Judici-
airy Committee was not the most important
committee OF the Assembly.
Il regard" answered Mr.. Dibble. "the
Committee on Ways and Means. of which
was chairman, as the most important COM
mttee."
Because you we're chairman? ?" inter-
posed Mr.. Henley.
NO" replied the witness: ''by reason OF
tile Importance of the measures presented TO
il for consideration"
Judge Coffey. searching for light, said In
his satirical vein. What was the matter
with the San Francisco delegation"
MIR. DibOle explained that this once eX-
allied committee had lost its prestige since
the adoption Of the new constitution and is
prohibition Of special legislation.
RED BLUFFS REPRESENTATIVE.
Assemblyman J. T. Matlock, Red Bluff
lawyer, was sworn next He is a man of
great glrth, with projecting eyebrows and
dense whiskers, who allows his hair on the
left side TO drO0p loosely over his massive
brow. When asked by Mr.. Reddy if he
knew anything about Assembly bill 7O6 Mr..
Matlock answered that lie remembered no
such bill.
Commonly called the scalpers' BILL"
said Mr.. Reddy.
"Ahp' said the portly man from Red Bluff,
changing his silk hat from his right hand to
his left. Il know that bill"
did Mr.. Bruner ever speak to you about
the scalpers' bill" inquired Mr. Reddy.
NO" replied Mr.. Matlock. 81 read
about the bill IN the newspapers. / was
chairman Of tie Committee on Roads and
Highways and also a member Of the Com
mittee on Irrigation, but paid very little
attention to irrigation"
Assembly man G. tF. Lacy of sSalnas.
Monterey County, yonng Scion, was the
next to be called. He said he was a lawyer
now, but he had not been admitted to prac-
tice al the time he was elected TO the As
sembly. he never remembered hearing
bill zoo discussed.
PARTIALLY FOR COAINuTTEMEN.
Assemblyman George a. Wentworth OF
San Francisco looked very dressy in his
white satin bow and Iimless eyeglasses
as be held up his hand while the clerk adj
ministered the formal oath. He testified
the same as the other witnesses. He said that
preference was given to members in call
ing up bills in the cOmmittee-rOOms
Assemblymau L. a. Freeman was the
only specialized legislator called TO the
stand. He too wore a white tie, which
formed sharp contrast TO his dark beard
and mustache. He was from jackson,
AmadOr County. He said he never had a
very friendly acquaintance with Mr..
Bruner
Assemblyman J. r. Lowe Of Santa Clara
followed Mr. Lacy. When he stood up TO
be sworn the back Of his Prince Albert was
frescoed with new City Hall whitewash
from the shoulders to the tails. This eyi-
dence of his sitting posture against the
walls Of the witnesses room his companions
had forgotten TO remove. Mr.. Lowe showed
that he had very recently blocked out q new
set OF Burnside WhiskerS. which were COM
ing out pale terra Gotta hue. In an ami
able tone Of voice he told Mr. Reddy that
Mr.. Bruner had never spoken to him about
Assembly bill 706 nor had he any recollec-
ton of the course the bill had taken.
NOT HOSTILE TO BRUNEI.
You do not mean by that that you were
hostile to Mr.. Bruuer?" asked Judge Coffey.
''Oh, certainly not" he answered Il
mean that had only passing acquaintance
with him"
Then the witness testified he had no recol-
lection about bill FOG.
Mr.. Freeman was the only witness cross
examined. Mr.. Henley asked him what his
politics were. He said he was Republi-
can. He was then asked how he had voted
on the report submitted in the Assembly
when Mr.. Bruner was exonerated. Wit
ness replied that he had voted against the
minority report which exonerated the de-
PENDANT. AT this stage Mr.. Reddy said the
defense would excuse from further attend
ance the witnesses who had testified, Messrs.
Lynch, Burke, Barnett, Murphy OF Guerne-
vile and Reese Clark.
Mr.. Hcnley-The prosecution will place
MI. Barnett on the stand al the proper time.
On account OF the illness of Mr. Ottinger
whose further cTOsS-sXaminatiOn was next
in order, II was agreed to postpone the
further hearing Of the case until Wednes-
day morning next at IL o'clock, whereupon
the attending members of the Legislature
diffused themselves throughout the CORR
doris Of the City Hall.
A COUNTY EXPENSE ACCOUNT.
The cost Of witnesses for the present trial
Of Bruner has been S226 so. OF this amount
S2e5 was audited yesterday by order of the
court. The witnesses are all from other
counties. and the expenses were as follows :
John G.. Lynch. S5S 60; +. A. Freeman,
$50 SO; James X. Laine, S14 80; w. Ii. Gal