The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-11-28

that record held over them like scourge.
And by reason of this the defendant lost
the benefit of certain evidence. Jurors
were approached, and not only their mo-
tives and opinions questioned, but their
decisions anticipated and published.
Besides these allegations the affidavit
contains printed articles from the news
papers published during the trial as evil
dence of the spirit of antagonism to the
prisoner, utterly preventing him from re-
ceiving a fair trial The opening pages of
the great document referred to the efforts
of the defense to get change OF venue and
the failure in spite of sufficient grounds to
support his plea, and that consequently
the defendant was forced to stand trial in
a locality inimical TO him. Then Durrant
alleges in his affidavit the long-arm at
tack upon Charles III. Clark in Boston, an
important alibi-witness. The newspapers,
especially the Examiner and Chronicle,
not only began to make things interesting
for Clark here but are said TO have set their
Boston men to work digging up his record.
He was charged with embeZZlement, and
the Chronicle was said to have gone SO far
as to say she will be arrested to-day"
Next day those newspapers were said to
have denied their own stories.
Then the paper passed on to the cases of
Pawnbroker Oppenheim and Lehman, who
pawned q ring, both of whom were said to
have been worried by certain newspapers.
Mrs. Monler is alleged to have refused to
testify for the defense because of press at
tacks upon her.
The incident of excusing Juror Walter
S. Brown after he had been accepted by
both sides was mentioned. The objection
to Brown was caused by the report of his
services in the Howell counterfeitting case
in the United States court. All the pro-
ceedings of Judge Murphy's court regard
ing the Brown affair were set forth verba-
tim in the affidavit, and in it Durrant
claims that Brown had perfect right to
sit as juror, and that his unjust dismissal
prejudiced Durrant's case in the minds
of the other Jurors.
Then the case of Nathan Croker anothe,
Juror who had been challenged by the de-
tense and the challenge overruled, was
alluded to as an incident injurious to the
defendant.
Reference was had to the matter of deal
ing with newspaper men for contempt,
the defendant omplaining that Judge
Murphy had refused TO cite certain news
paper people for having interviewed Jurors
and improperly published those inter
views.
said Judge Murphy, interrupting the read
ing. "Can you give the date of the time
when that citation was refused?"
II haven't the date here" said General
Dickinson, "but I am very positive that
such request was made"
II am as positive that none was made"
returned the Judge. II expected that you
would do so, but / have no recollection
that you did. repeat, that is sweeping
assertion, and l hope District Attorney
Barnes will make note of it,"
And that officer, sitting under the Judi
ciaI eye, mentally made the requested
note.
AS General Dickinson resumed the read
ing the Judge interrupted him again and
again by requesting him to make all
charges specific as to the character. paper
and dates.
do you use all of the articles you refer
to-" said he.
mo, only use the headings. Ii 1 used
the articles this would make an immense
volume"
; The affidavit then took up the Examiner
and Chronicle publications relative to the
notebook and the lecture alibi matters
and the alleged emnity Of the medical
students toward Durrant. The disrobing
story, in which Mrs. Clayton's daughter,
Ida, was alleged to have been insulted in
/ the church by Durranr, and Indignantly
denied next day by the young lady,was re.
ferred to.
The District Attorney is busy preparing
-at1idavits, which he will offer in
opposition to the motion of the defense.
The arguments will probably consume
several days, running well into the coming
week. The hearing will be resumed to-
morrow morning at 10 clock.