The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-05-05
He Refuses to Transfer the
Liquor Mems Test Case
Under Fire.
HAD A BREEZY TILT IN COURT.
Attorneys Cross and Hiilyer Ex-
change Some Tart Person
alitieS.

validity of the so-called ''side-entrance"
ordinance.
Coleman was convicted in the Police
Court of violating the ordinance and had
been granted a new trial by Judge Bahrs.
A few days ago the Union for Practical
Progress passed some scathing resolutions
concerning Judge Bahrs for, as believed,
discharging Coleman, and intimating that
the court was attorney for the liquor
mems organization, entitled the California
Protective Association, which made 1t dis
creditable for him not to have transferred
the case.
Immediately the case came up Attorney
Cross arose and glancing over his shout
der at Curtiss Hillyer, the associate coun-
sci of the District Attorney in the matter,
asked leave to make a statement which he
deemed pertinent.
.There are certain windy clubs in this
City" said he, (which appear to think
they can run the courts, and there is a GER
tain individual who has endeaYored to use
one of these clubs to coerce the courts.
That individual, whose name is Hlllyer,
had conversation with me last week and
told me he knew exactly what the court
would do in this case.
with nv refusal to listen to him he got
one of those windy clubs | referred to to
pass a set of windy resolutions full Of
falsehoods and tending to blacken this
court. These resolutions set forth that
your Honor had discharged the defendant
without cause, and that you were attorney
for a board interested in the proceedings
and therefore partial.
"Now, as a matter of fact, this is sim
pie case to test the validity Of a City ordi-
nance. The defendant has not been dis
charged, but simply given new trial. and
your Honor's connection with the or
ganiZation in question was not contem-
poraneous with the bringing of this matter.
81 think the matter of these windy clubs
should be permanently stopped; this side
show business has gone far enough. The
object is simply to force the matter into
some court where the Judge will be too
timid to try the matter impartially. l in
tend to take steps to relieve your Honor
from the intimidation OF these Winoy clubs
and to have this man Hillyer disbarred for
contempt of court on account OF his dis
reputable methods.
ALTHOUGH am a member OF the Bar
Association | cannot prevail on that body
to take up such matters, but l will take
steps myself. In this case and in this
class of cases your Honor can go on fear
lessly, in spite of all attempts to heap
ignoniiny upon you. Some people of this
windy club, who ought rather to be pass
ing ordinances against side entrances to
churches, may be brought TO bar for dis
crediting the courts"
Attorney Curtis HiIlyer protested against
being subjected to any abusive attack in
the matter. He denied that he had any
connection with the Union OF Practical
Progress, although he was secretary of the
Citizens Defense Association, which had
done something to purify the City. His
organization had not passed resolutions as
to Coleman. This was an unexpected in
suit, and all he could say was that any
contempt proceedings would be welcomed.
MY course" he concluded, ''has been
absolutely free from reproach, and any
thing alleged to the contrary is false"
Cross explained that he did not mean to
Jest about the side-door entrances to
churches. This was a serious matter.
But he thought it significant that In forty
years side-door entrances to saloons had
only produced one murder, while in the
same period side-door entrances to
churches had produced two murders of
such revolving character as to horrify the
world.
Judge Bahrs then made statement. He
said he was not expected to take notice of
any resolutions, but as he took all the
papers he would have been a little less
than human if he had not been affected by
those referred to.
''This case" said he, twas pending
when l came to the bench. There was
never any formal motion to transfer the
case. After argument on the constitution
atty of the ordinance [ found the judg-
ment of the lower court defective, and the
Supreme Court has held it perfectly right
in such case to order a new trial.
There is no reason why the respondents
should not have decided this question in
some other department if they chose. l
understand there are fifty to hundred
-, .f,,-
of them could be made test case in some
other department. That they did not do
so was presumption that they were will
ing to abide by my decision.
''AS to the question of my relation to the
LIQUOR mems association, that organization
was not In existence when | came to the
bench. The only action | have taken in
that connection is TO advise moderation in
the board, and have advised counsel that
in my opinion the ordinance permitted
discrimination.
NOW that both counsel in this case are
willing TO have the trial before me, | see
NO reason for transfer"
Hilyer then, to make the matter of
record, moved for a transfer of the case
Gross objected strongly, declaring that
by stipulation this was an agreed case and
no other could be quickly presented. a
great many men were Inconvenience in
their business by the delay. He could IN
derstand that counsel after its failure TO
'bulldoze" the court now fell back on a
request for a transfer.
Judge Bahrs said: AZ certainly object to
transferring this case under fire.
Hillyer expressed a willingness to take
up any other case upon which counsel
would agree.
Il object TO taking up any other case,
retorted Cross. Il am not going to yield
an inch 10 these resoluting clubs who seek
to jam this department. I oppose any
transfer until legal cause is presented for
transfer
Hillyer SAID he did not wish to subject
the court TO any criticism and, indeed, had
been instrumental in suppressing much, as
Mr.. Cross could fnd out.
al don't want TO do any digging" re-
marked Cross sarcastically. Il simply
want the case set for trial"
The court having signifed that the case
must take the same course as any other
Assistant District Attorney Hosmer pro-
posed May Is as the date for rehearing.
Hillyer said he was simply driven" to
agree as the counsel would not consent TO
take up another case. Cross said this claim
of being driven to set the case for trial
should be incorporated in another set OF
resolutions. The matter was finally set for
the 18th inst. by consent.
Judge Bahrs remarked finally: 81 am
not overanxious TO try this case, but if
7 -