The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-09-27

OF the errors that had been mace by the other
"No, sir Not because of errors, but because
of the liability to error
The witness here stated that he con-
sidefed the former system OF keeping the
tally-roll one that was very likely to lead
to errors.
do you know Mr.. Ross?"
eyes; met him in Sacramento"
"How long have you known Mr. Ross?'
about three years"
GLOW well have you known him?"
"About es well as many other members OF
the Glass;
"Have you discussed the subject of the roll
call with Mr.. Ross?"
~ have no recollection of having done So"
"Now, as TO the eragures. Are there any
other places where similar ones have been
maker"
"The same thing happened last June"
After some questions concerning the
erasures made in June, Mr.. Deuprey again
made offer of the rollbook as evidence.
Barnes--I object again to the Introduction of
this rollbook, because the evidence is that this
is not the book of iginai entry, and that the
entries made in it concerning the attendance
on the Sd of April were transferred from an
other page to the one where they are now found
Therefore, we hold the roll to be in no sense a
record of the attendance that day, and hold it
to be irrelevant and imma terial.
The court-The evidence is that these en-
tries in both cases were made by the witness
subsequently changed by the witness TO the
proper page. 1t seems to me an analogous case
would be that of O bookkeeper who should
make an error in his books and then correct 1t.
In that case, although the erasures could be
considered by the jury, it could hardly be held
that the books were not admissible believe
this to be the proper view of the matter and
will admit the ROLL
Deuprey-Have you any recollection of Dur
rant being, present?
sNo, sir"
"Have you recollection of any of the other
seventy-four students being PRESENT."
81 could not swear to any of them"
| Juror Smyth-In whose charge Is the roll.
| book kept?
| Witness-In mine. keep 1t ct home. Some
| times DR.. Cheney borrows 1t to examine.
| Deuprey-Is this the only record of attend
ance kept?
Witness-Yes, sir.
| The COURT want to understand this matter
! have any way of knowing who it is that an
| swers TO the name called? Can you tell
| whether 1t is the proper person or whether
some one else answers for the name that is
| called?
Witness-I have no means of telling who
| answers.
Deuprey-But hasn't an examination been
made of all the Seventy-four members of the
class? And was not the result of that exam
ination that no one could be found who an.
swered for Durrant?
Bernes-We object.
The court-You may bring all the seventy.
four members here and ask them, but you
| can't ask for this witness opinion.
Deuprey-Then l will ask you, Have you
made any such investigation or has any one
for you?
"Did you answer for Durrant?" then asked
Deuprey, as though he were starting in on the
task of interrogating all the seyeniy-four mem
bers.
Dr. Cheney then came back on the
stand. Mr.. Deuprey asked him whether
Mr.. Gray came to him and asked him about
the mistake made in the rollcall, and
whether he had then instructed Mr.. Gray
to make the necessary change or correc-
ton.
Mr.. Barnes objected to this, and the
court said it might be answered in SO far
as witness might have directed the correc-
ton.
Witness answered that he did order the
correction made.
az told him to make the change, and he
afterward told me he had done So" said wit
ness.
Juror Smyth-When was this done?
ION the Sd of April"
"At your lectures is there any confusion that
would prevent proper hearing of the roll
call?" asked Deuprey.
''Did you have a conversation with General
Dickinson last Friday concerning this mat
teri"
s.Did you not say to him in the presence of
Durrant-''
Mr. Barnes dnterruptngl-I object to any re-
mark made to General Dickinson as being
irrelevant.
Judge Murphy think the objection proper.
MIR. Deuprey-Did you not say to him that
your rollcal was correct, and from your inves-
tigation that il was your opinion that w. II. T.
Durrant was present at your lecture on
April 3?
District Attorney Barnes objected to this
question, and his objection was sustained
by Judge Murphy. Thereupon Mr.. Deu-
prey offered to frame the question in
another manner.
Mr.. Deuprey-At that conversation at your
Office on Friday last, when General Dickinson,
one of the counsel Tor defen dant and myself
were present, did you not say TO him that you
were satisfied that your roll was correct. and
that you were satisfied that Mr.. Durrant was
present at your lecture?
The District Attorney again put in an
objection on the ground that the question
was incompetent, irrelevant and hearsay.
Upon Judge Murphy sustaining the objec-
tion the defense took exception to his
Honor's ruling.
The court-The reason sustain the obiec-
| ton is because, in my opinion, it tends to
elicit something which is in the nature OF
| hearsay.
Mr.. Deuprey-How many students have you
| in your class, doctor?
s'About seventy to seventy-four."
| "That is ALL.
| Upon cross-examination Mr.. Barnes
offered witness paper containing, in type
writing, the names of the members of DR..
Cheney's class on April 8. and asked him
| to mark off or it the absentees.
Mr.. Deuprey wanted to see the paper
| first. Then he objected to it on the ground
that it might not be correct list.
| Judge Murphy said the witness could
| mass unon that pOint
DR.. Cheney said it was correct, and then
checked off the absentees.
Mr.. Deuprey wanted the paper then
marked for identification. Mr.. Barnes did
not. The court held that the District At
torney had perfect right to make what
use he pleased of the paper, and offer it OF
not.
Chow long have you been an instructor al
the college, doctor?n asked Mr.. Barnes.
| NEARLY six years"
| "What has been your experience, during
| that time, as to students answering present fol-