The herald., 1894-11-20
Afternoon seaaton.

The first witness put forward in the
afternoon was Herman Zdber. residing
in East Los Angeles. He testified to
knowing defendant for 10 years. His
reputation previous to the time Of the
homicide. according to witness, was
bad.
Cross. examined "What was his
general reputation ?' inquired Mr..
Gunther.
II consider that man that is quar-
relsome. fighting and seeking trouble. is
q bad character"
Don't you know that general yepu-
tation is what people say about man
well. that's what they said about
him."
Can You give the name Of anyone ?"
'B. F. Bradd, colorsd man."
Anyone else?"
II can't remember"
And the only name you can give out
OF all those that you say spoke III OF the
defendant is that OF coloyed man 7"
II can't remember. There was p. S.
Johnson, too. He lives at San Bernar-
dino, but he's in town today
E. V. Norten, a warehouseman On
Alameda street, spoke of The quite
bad" reputation OF the defendant.
Cross.examined-"I knew when he
was with the railroad, aad since, and he
nsed to 60 on those drinking spells and
be quite quarrelsome. l can't remem-
Der names. 1t was matter OF every day
conversation. Possibly if l Thought
over the matter l could remember
Names"
''rake week or two to think it YER"
generously conceded Mr.. Guthrie.
"You and defendant have not been on
friendly terms. have you?"
UNLESS he says so, l don't know. l
have not thought his acquaintance de-
sirable, and have not had any thing to
do with him for years"
Albert Cohen, 49 South Main, gro
Gerry man, did not have very clear
knowledge of what ccnstitu ed general
reputation" ana was retired.
James A. Cafter, a colored man, testi.
fed to living af 627 Buena Vista street
OF the 25th OF July. "Oa that even.
ing" said the witness, II cav him"
Objection interpos-d to the Introduce
ton of this line of examination. The
prosecution claimed that the de!en O
for the killing, they reserved the right
W EhVW Vhnp "Ab-i Rti . PCc0 Ocicuu u
made his way from the ranch and pro
ceeded to carry out his threats OF
"cleaning out the Hunter family"
Counaei desiring to argue the point,
and produce authorities, the jurg wac
retired temporarily. a
From shortly before O'Clock until 20
minutes past O'Clock Attorney Geg.
argued and quoted from an.horities,
The first case (66 CALI. 27l) Vas the
People against Gray. and Mr.. Gage an
nounced that if this, and other cases to
be cited, were not exactly similar, it,
was because it was but very aelaom
sucl q Wholesale and diabolical crime
was committed. The case qnoted wen t
to show that in order to make the crimi.
nal intent apparent, and when such in.
tent forms an essential element, excep.
t:onn to the general rules OF evid ence
are proper and must be- made In the
case OF the People We. Walters (99 Calf :,
1881 referred to the admission OF evil
dencs bearing OH distinct offense
to prove the otfense charged, and
the court ruled further that the
objections that such course would
prejudice the minds OF the Jury could
not be held as solid. In the case OF Far.
rieh VS.. the people, Mr.. Gage said it was
curious that the point should have come
up in the state of Illinois, where defend-
ant belonged. 1t was rendered still
more curious by Judge Smith saying
that he was present OF that identical
trial. The people vs.. Cunningham COG
Gal. GID and multitude OF others from
the California and common law reports
we're read and com mentsd upon, to sho W
the connection existing in the defend.
ants mind when he said he had "re-
volvers enough for the whole Hunter
family"
Attorney Guthrie replied for the de-
Tense, and stated that many OF the cases
quoted by Mr.. Gage had been dilated
upon in the case Of tie people vs.. Lane
Mr. Guthrie had not quite such lonp