The San Francisco call., 1895-08-02
ADMITS HIS MISTAKE.
Letters Sent to His Wife and
to Counsel for the
Defense.
ADDITIONAL JURORS SWORN
Six Men Secured to Weigh Evidence
for and Against the Ac-
CuSed.
THE DURRANT CASE IN A MINUTE
BRIEF REVIEW OF THE PROCEEDINGS.

THE DURRANT CASE IN MINUTE
BRIEF REVIEW OF THE PROCEEDINGS.
Six Jurors have been secured to try William
Henry Theodore Durrant, for the murder OF
Blanche Lamont They are:
Thomas W. Seiberlich.
Irwin J. Truman.
NJ r. Dempster.
Nathan Crocker.
Walter S. Brown.
Charles 2. Nathan.
The two last-named were secured yester-
day after the examination of a number OF
veniremen To the last, Mr.. Nathan, the de-
fense interposed an objection on the ground
that he had formed an opinion on the case,
but, after few questions by the court, Mr..
Nathan stated that he could set the opinion
aside and try the case fairly and impartially.
His Honor thereupon disallowed the challenge,
and the defense refusing to exercise the per-
emptory challenge on Mr.. Nathan, renewed its
original challenge for cause and had an eX-
ception noted.
Before adjournment of the case till Monday,
Judge Murphy ordered venire of 300 names
drawn, returnable 100 Monday morning, so
Tuesday, 100 Wednesday and so Thursday.
1t is thought that before this number is eX-
hausted the jury will have been secured.
Captain Lees has a statement from Earl H.
H Clark, wife of the new witness for the de-
fense, called upon him and stated that her
husband must have been mistaken in saying
he met Blanche Lamont on April 3. Mrs.
Clark gives very strong reasons, and backs
them up by letter from her husband in
which he says he has written a letter to Mr..
Deuprey in which he states that he is mis-
taken as to the date upon which he saw Miss
Lamont.
There will be hundreds of columns of
testimony in the Durrant trial that not
even the viIest and most sensational of
the 'fash" Eastern papers would dare to
publish for fear of incurring the disap-
proval of their patrons; consequently no
one need expect to have all the testimony
presented in the daily press of this City.
All the news papers of San Francisco will
refuse to publish that great mass of objec-
tionable matter. In this refusal the papers
will be justified. There may, however, be
a divergence in regard to the latitude
taken by the several editors in handling
this branch of the case. THE CALLS posi-
ton in this regard has already been out
lined and will be followed regardless OF the
policy pursued by others. There is a
definite line of demarcation between that
which is decent and that which is inde-
cent. In sensational journalism there seems
to be an effort to constantly hover near that
hateful line, and even step beyond is some
times risked if it may be ventured without
calling forth summary condemnation by the
public. THE CALL is guided by a different
principle. Its effort is not to approach the
fatal line as near as may be, but to avoid it
fo- 81, I, -,
pursued by THE CALL in reporting the
Durrant case. ALI the pertinent and i'm
portant news of the trial will be fully and
faithfully set forth with perfect impartial
ity, but the minute details of offensive and
Objectionable features will be eliminated
in order that no clean mind may be sullied
in perusing a comprehensive report of the
case. This will not detract from the news
value of the account published, but will
rather increase the worth of THE CALLS
report to the intelligent and careful reader
The search for jurors in the Durrant case
was resumed with new energy in Judge
Murphy's department yesterday morning.
The defendant was on hand, looking
brighter and more at ease for some days,
and called happy smile to his face as his
father and mother came in and saluted
him.
When the court had been raped to
order, the clerk was instructed to call the
names of those who had been summoned
on the last venire, and all but twenty-five
of the seventy-fve responded. Attach
ments were ordered issued for the abb
sentees, returnable Monday, and Judge
Murphy announced his readiness to listen
to those who had excuses to offer. At mis-
request that those wishing to be excused
should come forward, the entire panel,
almost, rose as one man and started for
the railing. His Honor made sarcastic
remark to the effect that ne was glad to see
how eager the gentlemen present were to
do their duty, and then he bent his ear to
listen to their stories.
John A. Hammersmith and Marion Lev
intrltt were excused on the ground that
they were members of the Grand jury
and Louis Bergerot on the ground of the
insutficlency OF his acquaintance with the
English language. By reason of the fact that
jury duty would cause material injury to
their business, Thomas A. Farless, NJ.
Kaiser, William Wettland, Lawrence c.
Gull, John Rosenquist, j. H. Mooser, w.
+. Empey, II. Lohmann, E. F. w. Allen
and K. w. Broderick; on account of physi-
cal intirmity, L. Guggenheimer, ]. Stone,
NJ. D. Nolan and J. w. Carroll were ex-
cused. A L. Dennison was allowed to go
for the reason that he is an employe of
Uncle Sam and Rev. Thomas FiIben by
reason of the fact that he is a clergyman.
Active and retired members of the Ma
tional Guard were excused as follows: H.
H. Kohler, 1. Leipsig, H. Joost, George
Easton, T. W. Eaton and Richard Wall
man. H. L. Van Winkle was excused on
the ground of non-residence and George
Maxwell by reason of his connection with
the Fire Department.
The regularity with which excuses
poured in annoyed his Honor greatly.
"The fact is" he said, as he allowed one
excuse, "that there is only the slightest
disposition on the part of the people to do
their duty, and 1 am tired of it."
The court then ordered seven of the new
panel, together with Robert Hochstadter.