The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-10
Mr.. Barnes Desires to
Excuse Him From
Serving.
HE RISES TO EXPLAIN.
The Real Reason Why He
Failed to Convict M.
B. Howell.
NO BRIBEs WERE OFFERED
Counsel for the Defense Object
to the District Attorneys
Motion.
THE DURRANT CASE IN A MINUTE-BRIEF
REVIEW OF THE PROCEEDINGS


Juror Walter S. Brown had his opportunity
yesterday. He was given full leave by Judge
Murphy to make a statement concerning
his action as juror in the Howell coun-
terfeiting case, and he made good use
OF the privilege. 1t was all brought
about by a request from District At
torney Barnes for permission from the court
TO use a peremptory challenge on Mr.. Brown
and excuse him from duty in the case. The
defense vigorously objected, but the court al
lowed Mr.. Barnes to examine the Juror, also
against the protest of Durrant's counsel, to
show cause why his request should not be
granted. In response to questions Mr.. Brown
told the story of his connection with the How
ell case, giving well the full story of the visits
of reporters to his residence on last Tuesday
night.
Judge Murphy took the matter under advise
ment, and will give his decision on Monday
morning.
Eighteen veniremen were examined during
the day, but not an extra juror was secured.
An order for 200 more was made by the court
and drawn. Half of them will appear in
court on Monday, the remainder on Tuesday
Out of these it is supposed the necessary jurors
will be secured.
1t is thought that Judge Murphy will take
sction this morning on the request of General
Dickinson for citations for contempt for the
The ladies were IN the majority in De-
partment of the Superior Court yesterday
when court convened, and they held the
balance of numbers through all the morn
ing proceedings. The majority of them
were well dressed and pretty, but the
prisoner maintained an apparent indiffer-
ence TO all the feminine glances, which
would have been thought remarkable in
any one else. His demeanor in court,
however. ever since the trial began has
been studiously composed, until now it
would take some very startling occurrence
to startle him into anything like curiosity.
Even the pale young woman who has ex-
pressed such a yearning 10 present him
with pea blossoms was entirely overlooked
by the youthful accused.
Judge Murphy ordered the call of the
jurors in the box the moment he took his
seat, and the nine having responded
promptly, his Honor inquired as to the
whereabouts of defaulting veniremen, for
whom attachm ents had been issued, But
one of them, G. A. Zeil, an insurance man,
was present, an d he convinced his Honor
that he had not been served to appear as a
venireman until the evening before. Alfred
Bo uvier of the Baldwin Theater stated to
the court that his business would suffer
were he compelled to serve on the jury.
He was excused.
At this point the District Attorney arose
and attempted to attract the attention of
the court. Everybody present felt that
something important was about to ensue.
III your Honor please" he began, 'be-
fore filling the box l desire to"
But that's as far as he got.
II will hear you" replied his Honor,
"after we get through with these examina-
tions. Mr.. Clerk, call the names of three
gentlemen from the box"
Mr.. Barnes sat down, and Messrs. G. A.
Zeil, S. NJ. Capp and n. F. Walter were
sworn. The District Attorney made his
statement. of the case and the examination
began.
q. A. Zeil, an insurance man, residing
at 2514 Clay street, was challenged and ex-
cused on the ground that he could not
reconcile his conscience to returning ver-
dict on circumstantial evidence where the
death penalty would ensue.
S. NJ. Capp, residing at 745 Golden Gate
avenue, was challenged by the defense
and excused for the reason that he had an
opinion on the case which only strong
evidence would remove. n. F. Walter, re-
siding at 1922 O'Farrell street, was excused
on the same ground. E. NJ. Taylor was
challenged for the same reason and al
lowed to depart.
S. Strauss of 1852 Leayenworth street
had conscientious scruples against the in
Fiction of the death penalty. He was
challenged by the prosecution and excused.
]. ]. Applegate of LII Stockton street
had answered all the questions of the
prosecution and defense satisfactorily and
seemed to possess all the qualifications
necessary to the making of new Juror
when it was discovered that his name was
not on the last assessment-roll. He was
challenged for this reason and excused.
P ]. Cleary of 708 Octavia street had a
strong opinion on the case and his chaI-
lenge by the defense was allowed
r. G. Horn of 626 Twenty third street
had such an opinion that he did not be-
lieve he could be fair and impartial Juror
He was challenged and the challenge was
allowed.
N R. Ellis, contractor, living at Oil
Twenty-fifth street, was also challenged,
and excused on the ground that he had
formed an opinion which it would take
strong evidence to remove. a. McNab of
922 Twenty-tirst street knew many persons
who attended Emmanuel Baptist Church,
and had strong opinion on the case. A
challenge to him was allowed.
J. R. Rohde, who resides at Mission and
Valencia streets, stated that he would not
bring in verdict OF guilty On circumstan-
tIdl Sf4uShNC AOAO VIC POAAoAbJ WYNN NC
death.
j. Z. A. Healms OF bib Howard street
was challenged for the reason that he had
a strong opinion on the case.
B. Mish was excused for the reason that
he had conscientious scruples against the
infiction of the death penalty. G. S. Fech-
heimer OF 1881 Broadway and E. w. Briggs,
the cigar man, were both challenged and
excused by reason of the possession of
strong opinion.
NJ Lippman, residing at 1740 Taylor
street, explained that he was suffering
from an illness which would prevent him
acting as juror, and was excused by con-
sent.
J. Gilsen of 4l0 Hyde street possessed an
opinion which it would require strong evil
dence to remove. J. Cahill had conscien-
tious scruples against the infection of the
death penalty. Each was challenged and
excused.
II am informed" said his Honor, "that
this exhausts the box. Did / understand,
Mr.. Barnes, that you had something to
say?"
Eyes, your Honor" replied the District
Attorney, 81 desire to ask the court for
permission, under section 1868 of the Penal
Code, to address further inquiries to a
juror already sworn and accepted in this
case in order ~ show cause If noasihle |