The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-10-03
SHOOK WILL NOT TESTIFY
He Did Not See Durrant and
Blanche Lamont Together
on April 8.
DIR. GIBSON TO BE A WITNESS.
Accused's Notes on DR.. Cheney's
Lecture Compare With Those of
Other Students.

Inc efforts or the prosecution to secure
Harry E. Shook as a witness in the Dur
rant case will likely prove of no avail, for
he himself says his testimony is of no
value, and he was so informed by Captain
Lees. He may be called to testify that he
has seen Durrant and Blanche Lamont to-
gether near the church, to combat the
assertion of the defense that the two were
never together in that locality, but he will
not be called to prove anything which may
have happened upon the fatal Sd of April
Captain Lees had been misinformed when
he made his statement Tuesday evening
that Shook was positive about the date.
Speaking of the stories which have been
printed about what he was expected to tes-
tify to, Mr.. Shook said last night: cit is
true that have been seen by Detective
Seymour in regard to a report that I had
seen Durrant and Blanche Lamont near
the church on April 3. know had seen
the two together near the church, and it.
occurred to me that it might have been
upon that day, because | thought l had
been near there then. L have since found
that if l was there at all it must have been
upon April 4, when Blanche Lamont was
already dead.
''The story started in this way: The
Epworth League of my church-the Grace
Methodist Episcopal-met on the evening
of April 2. AT that meeting an assessment
of 81 made by the Epworth League AL
lance was ordered paid, and the next day,
as thong ht, called on Miss Daisy VIII
son, the treasurer of the league, who had
not been present at the meeting to collect
the amount. She lives at 2051l Bartlett
street. which is near Twenty-second. She
was not at home, so | came down again to
Mission and Twenty first streets, and
there | saw her with two friends. l told
her of my errand to her house. She went
home, and soon after-it must have been
between 4 and o'clock, Miss Wilson
says-I went out to her house again and
got the 81.
II thought all this happened on April
g. and as | know l had seen Durrant and
Miss Lamont together 1 thought it might
have been on that occasion. Captain Lees
asked me to assure myself of the exact
date, and on comparing notes l have come
to the conclusion it must have been April
4. Miss Wilson's books show that the
money was paid on April 4, and she says
the entry was made the day the money
was paid. She says, too, that the ladies
with whom l saw her on Mission and
Twenty-irst streets were her cousins and
that they had Just returned from q trip in
the country. They know they returned
on April 4. Again, the Epworth League
Alliance met on the evening of April 4,
and it is quite probable that let the col
the meeting.
another thing-I have looked over my
books and l find nothing which would
bring me out in the vicinity of the EN-
manuel Church on April 3. so, if / went at
all, must have gone to collect the money
and that was on the 4th. When | told
this to Captain Lees the day before yester-
day he said my testimony would do no
good, as it must have been the day after
Blanche Lamont was murdered that 1 was
out near the church"
Shook is an undertaken, whose place of
Company parlors, is at 2419 Mission, near
Twenty-tirst street. He knew Durrant
and Blanche Lamont well, and he has seen
them together in the vicinity of the En-
manuel Church He knew he was out
near the church himself some time soon
after April 2, and the suggestion of the
murder connected the two facts.
During the examination of the students
OF Cooper Medical College yesterday one of
the questions most frequently asked by
Mr.. Deuprey was whether or not the wit
ness remembered that sterilization of milk
was one of the topics discoursed upon by
DR.. Cheney during his lecture on April s.
when 1.-The Preparation of Infant Food
With Regard to Making 1t Pure was the
subject. The question in itself apparently
had little significance, but it will have
strong bearing upon the defendants case
IN proving that ne was present at the
lecture.
The notes of the students who were pres
ent that day show that the subject in chief
was as quoted, and that the following
formed the sub-topics of the lecture:
1.-The Arnold Steam Sterilizer," Pas
teurization, "Filterization Recommended
Before Pasteurization, by DR.. Seibert of
New York THE Quantity of Food re-
quired by Infants According to Age"
During his remarks on the latter topic the
professor gave his own views with refer
ence to it together with those of DR. Smith
kins of New York, and then touched upon
the rule adopted by J. Louis Smith in the
same connection.
These things will be shown by the notes
of those students who were directed to ap-
pear again to-day with the original notes
they took on the lecture. When these
notes have been introduced in evidence
| the defense will undertake to prove that
DR.. Cheney's rolIcall is correct and that
Durrant must have been present at the
lecture, by offering in evidence his own
notes.
1t is expected by the defense that this