The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-12-25
Grand Jury Asks That the Of:
fender Be Removed From
His Office.
JURY FINALLY DISMISSED
Closing Report Submitted-Two In.
dictments Found-A Banquet for
Members in Prospect.

worm, SuperlDtenueHt VI OtreetS, SUD-
mitted its final report. and was finally
dismissed with thesthanks of the Judge.
The closing session was begun shortly
after 10 A. NJ, but there was some delay in
obtainin quorum. When the jury went
into court twelve members responded to
the rollcall. Judge Sanderson had the
impression that thirteen jurors were re-
quired to present an accusation. During a
pause in the proceedings, Assistant Dis
trict Attorney Black cited the statute,
showing that twelve constituted sutfi-
cient number.
Following is the text of the Ashworth
accusation:
In THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE CITY AND
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
The People of the State of California VS..
Thomas Ashworth.
The Grand Jury of the City and County of
San Francisco, State of California, makes and
presents this accusation against Thomas Ash
worth, for his willful misconduct while in Office
as follows, to wit:
That at all the times herein mentioned, the
said Thomas Ashworth was and Is the duly
elected, qualified and acting Superintendent of
Public Streets, Highways and Squares of the
That as such public officer he has willfully
and knowingly accepted street work done on
the public streets of said City and County, and
has recommended the acceptance of, and has
issued assessments for, the same, knowing the
said work not to be fully performed according
TO the specifications for said work, more par
ticularly as follows:
Under public contract No. 2012, the defend
ant recommended the acceptance of the pave
ment on Laguna street, between Oak and Fell,
on or about April l, 1895, knowing that the
gutterways did not have concrete foundation
OF the thickness and quality required by the
specifications. and that the rocks in said gutter
ways were laid in sand instead OF cement
mortar, as required by the specifications.
H.
The defendant has passed favorably upon the
macadamized roadway at the crossing of Clay
and Spruce streets under public contract No.
2094, knowing that the rock used was red rock
instead of blue rock, as required by the speci-
fcations, and not of the proper depth.
III.
The defendant favorably passed upon and
issued his certificate of satisfaction for work
on the roadway on Lyon street, between Wash
ington and Jackson, knowing that the gutter
ways had not the proper foundation, either as
gutterways were not properly bedded in cement
mortar. as required by the specifications, and
many OF the basalt blocks used being diversified ::
this work being done under private contract
No. 1906, and accepted by the defendant on or
about September 10, 1895.
".
On or about the same date, Septemb Der 10,
1895, the defendant accepted es satisfactory
the work under private contract No. 1898 for
the pavement of the roadway on Scott street.
between Green and Union streets, knowing
that the concrete foundation for the gutter
ways was not of the thickness or quality, and
that the rocks of said cutters were not properly
bedded in cement mortar, as required by the
specifications.
Under private contract 1864. for paving the
block on Pine street, between Webster and Fill
more streets, the defendant, on or about Sep
TENDER 80, 1895, accepted as satisfactory the
said work, knowing the same defects to exist
as alleged in the fourth allegation herein as to
the gutterways, the foundation thereof not
being of sufficient thickness, or of proper quail
ity, and the rocks in said gutterways not
being properly bedded in mortar, as required
by the specifications.
VI.
Under private contract No. 3412, on or about
September 10, 1895, the defendant accepted as
satisfactory the pavement of the roadway on
Laguna street, between Sacramento and Cali
fornia streets, knowing the same defects to
exist as to the gutterways and the laying of
the basalt blocks in said gutterways, as set
forth in the preceding allegation herein.
VII.
Under public contract No. 2193, the defend
ant accepted as satisfactory, on or about Nav
IL, 1895, the cement sidewalks on Valencia
street, between Thirteenth and Fourteenth
streets, though the said walks did not have tar
paper joints, as required by the specifications
VIII.
Under private contract No. 1888, the LAYING
of an ironstone pipe sewer on Chestnut street.
between Larkin and Polk streets, was accepted
by defendant as satisfactory, though the said
sewer was laid two feet above grade and was
four feet short of the property line at the cross
ing of Larkin and Chestnut streets.
Contrary to the form, force and effect of the
statute in such cases made and provided, and
against the peace and dignity of the PEG pie o
the State Of California.
Wherefore, the said Grand Jury pray that the
said Thomas Ashworth be required to answer
this accusation, and that upon his conviction
of the willful misconduct in office, as herein
charged against him, that judgment may be
pronounced that he, the said Thomas Ash
worth, be removed from his Office of Superin-
tendent of Public Streets, Highways and
Squares in and for the said City and County of
San Francisco, State OF California.
Signed) OLIVER ELpRIpGE,
Foreman OF the Grand Jury of the City and
County of San Francisco.
Dated December "a, 1895.
Judge Sanderson did not assign the
Ashworth accusation to any department,
but will probably make the assignment
next Tuesday.
The Grand Jury also indicted Bernard
Cedey for an assault on the person of
Annie Price The information sets forth
that an intoxicant was administered to
the girl. This is South San Francisco
case that brought a greater number of
witnesses before the jury.
D. A. Urquart was indicted for embezzle-
ment. The information sets forth that he
was employed as clerk for Frisbie, Ris-
don & Co., and while acting in that ca
pacity embezzled SIP of money belong
ing to the firm.
The final report of the Grand Jury is
concise. Following is the text of the doc
umeut:
Hon. A. A. Sanderson, Presiding Judge, Supe-
rfor Court: We have the honor to herewith