The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-07
JUROR BROWNS POSITION
1t Would Appear That He Has Suf-
fered a Change Of Heart.

1t Would Appear That He Has Suf-
fered a Change of Heart.
Juror Walter S. Brown is the man ovel
whom the District Attorney and the detec
tives have been worrying. No charge:
have been brought against him, but never
theless Captain Lees is not at all satisfied
1t was his record as a United States juror
in the case of Martin d. Howell, thai
caused the calling in of Secret Service
Agent of the Treasury N. R. Harris.
Howell was charged with receiving and
passing counterfeit money and Harris was
prosecuting witness on behalf of the Gov
eminent. Brown was one of the jurors in
the case and also one of the trio who stood
out for an acquittal. There was consider
able talk at the time about the stand taken
by the three and the United States Grand
Jury made an investigation. ALI the
jurors were summoned and examined, but
not trace of fraud was discovered. In
explaining his reasons for holding out fol-
acquittal Brown said he did not care to
convict a man wholly on circumstantial
evidence.
When being examined as to his fitness
to serve as Juror in the Durrant case THE
CALL gave the following account of the
proceedings:
Walter S. Brown, doing business at 535
Market street as silk, cotton and linen-thread
merchant, residing at 426 Ellis, was next ex-
amined. He stated that he had no conscien-
tious scruples against the infection of the
death penalty in proper cases; and, Also that
he would consider circumstantial evidence
and give it all the weight to which it was
entitled.
''Now," said the District Attorney, 'if the
circumstantial evidence produced were suf-
fcient to satisfy you of the guilt of the defend
a no wi RI n m NJ
of guilty where the result might be death?"
81 would if the evidence were sufficiently
strong" was the reply.
care you acquainted with the defendant,
Durrant, or with any member of his family?"
"No, SIR"
"Do you believe" continued Mr.. Deuprey,
"tnat you could act as q free and impartial
juror, if sworn to try this case between the
State and the defendant. solely as the evidence
is given in this court and under the instruc-
tions of this court 2"
al think So"
''Do you believe that circumstantial evidence
should be taken with great deal of caution ?''
continued Mr.. Deuprey.
well 1 certainly believe that it should be
given weight would convict on circumstan-
tial evidence if it were strong enough"
''You recognize, however, in receiving cir
cumstantlal evidence that 1t is to be taken
with great deal OF caution, and that the same
rule applies to evidence in regard to identifi-
cation-that is TO say, that there is greater
liability of mistake in the matter of identifica-
tlon OF g. person proDaDly than upon any
other subject that might be testified to2'
81 think so, replied Mr.. Brown.
"Do you know of any reason at this time,
Mr.. Brown, why you should not and could not
fairly and impartially try this case?
81 do not" was the reply, and Mr.. Brown
was passed for the time.
From this it would appear as though
Mr.. Brown has had a change of heart
since he was member of the iury in the
United States District Court in Novem-
Der, 1898.
Juror Brown denies that he has had
change of heart, and insists that an
erroneous inference has been drawn
from the report of proceedings in the
Howell case.