The morning call., 1895-01-26
endant could not have a fair and impartial

fendant could not have fair and impartial
trial.
The motion for change of venue was,
however, not looked upon with favorable
eye by Judge Murphy. He wanted to make
sure that the so-called prejudice existed.
When court opened for the business of
the day District Attorney Barnes arose and
read an affidavit in reply to those which
Attorney Livernash had filed Thursday on
behalf of the defendant. The affidavit
was a general denial of the allegations of
prejudice. Its reading, as well as that of
two similar affidavits which were signed
by Assistant District Attorney Peixotto
and Detective Robert Hogan, was listened
to attentively by young Mcdonald as he
sat beside his counsel. In fact, after the
trial was well under way, the defendant
busted himself in making notes of the pro-
ceedings and in holding whispered confer
ences with Mr.. Livernash.
After the reading of the afidavits Attor-
ney Livernash expressed desire to cross
examine the District Attorney, but Judge
Murphy refused to allow such proceed
ing, whereat Mr.. Livernash had an excep-
ton entered upon the records.
In the affidavits the existence of any
prejudice was denied, as was also the
statement that Mcdonald could not get a
fair trial.
81 now submit the motion for change
of venue,' said Mr.. Livernash, and the
defendant craned his head forward and
looked anxiously at the court.
well, replied Judge Murphy in slow
and deliberate tones, 81 will deny the mo-
ton Professionally. Let the examination
of talesmen proceed, and if it should ap-
pear to me from their replies to questions
that it is impossible to secure an unpreiu-
r.
willing to grant change of venue to some
other county. Let the examination pro-
ceed."
Mr.. Livernash entered another exception
to the ruling. Twelve talesmen then filed
into the jury-box, and District Attorney
Barnes read his opening statement, which
was simply to the effect that R. II. Nc
Donald Jr., while vice-president of the
Pacific Bank, did, in January, 1893 SUBJ
scribe and swear to statement of the
affairs of the bank which he knew to be
false.
1t did not take long after the examine
ton began for the interested listener to
understand the policy which will be
adopted by the defense and upon which it
will rely for an acquittal.
In the first place insanity will be one of
the main issues and talesmen were exam
ined very carefully as to what they thought
of the insanity plea in criminal cases, and
also as to their knowledge of "obscure"
forms of insanity. 1t is also pretty well
understood that the defense will make a
point of the fact that Mr.. Mcdonald, after
the custom of many business men in
routine affairs, sent the statement in Ques-
ton to notary public by messenger
boy, and technically speaking he did not
personally swear to it.
Paul Lindacher was the first talesman.
He was firmly of the opinion that Nc
Donald was guilty, and Livernash's chal-
lenge was allowed.
Marcus Unger followed. He had no
prejudices especially, and although Liver
nash challenged him it was not allowed,
and Unger was accepted finally as a Juror.
In addition to questions on insanity
talesmen were asked as to whether they
had been depositors in the Pacific or Peo-
pies Home banks, or if they knew any of
the McDonalds, NJ. A. Dorm, d. S. Dorm,
Columbus Waterhouse, James Alva Watt,
General ]. +. Sheehan and others; also II
what they had read and heard had preiu-
diced them so that testimony could not
remove their impressions.
Following is a list of those who had
strong preiudices against the defendant or
were excused through other reasons:
Walter Fitzhold, Solomon Zeckand, Al
fred Murkens, Fred w. Butler, Herman
Friedlander, Henry K. Devalli, Martin r.
Roberts, Charles Nuremberg, Jules H.
Ridorf, Robert r. Raphael, George l..
SWEET, G. II. Wadsworth, Charles H. Dolan,
Thomas Dennigan, II. Alvers, r. B. Dalle-