The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-06-16
Alleges That Many TWenties
Were Paid Jurors in Her
Late Case.
ASKS JUDGMENT FOR S250,C0O.
In an Interview the Fair Litigant
Hints of Important Evidence
to Come.


Court yesterday afternoon complaint VS..
E. B. Pond, acting as administrator with
will annexed of the estate of Henry Mar
tin, deceased, Arthur Rodgers and May
Martin. This suit is brought on the part
of John B. Martin Jr., minor, through
Mrs, Martin, his guardian.
The opening clauses recite the history
of the celebrated Martin will case, and at
section the kernel of the cause is stated
as follows:
That since the trial of the said case, to w.t.
on about the Goth day of May, A. D. 1895,
and after the time TO move for new trial had
expired under the statute and laws of the State
of California, or TO get any relief in the matter
of said proceeding in the matter of the estate
of the said decedent in said department of the
said Superior Court, the said plaintiff first
learned and discovered the fact that some of
the jury Jurors Cody and Wambold excepted)
that so rendered the verdict IN said case were
secretly and corruptly bribed and paid money
by said defendants 10 render verdict against
the validity of said last will of said Henry
Martin, deceased.
That the way and manner that some of the
jurors were bribed and induced to render their
verdict is as follows: AS plaintiff is informed
and verify believes, and upon and according to
herinformation and belief alleges that said de-
PENDANTS did willfully ana wickedly combine
and conspire together and couusively to- and
did improperly and corruptly influence several
OF the jurors in said case Jurors Cody and
Wambold excepted, who refused to join in the
verdlcD TO render verdict in favor Of said de-
PENDANT, May (. Martin, and against the valid
ity of said will of February o. 1894.
That said defendant, May E. Martin, fur
nished the money for said purpose, and that the
other defendants, Pond and Rodgers, secretly
iDt said i,rro Of
courtroom while said case was on trial, and
talked with them and learned from said Jurors
that they thought baby John, meaning the
plaintiff, was entitled to the money, that is the
one-third mentioned in said will of February
%, 1893, meaning thereupon said defendants,
Pond and Rodgers, said 'that they, the jurors,
would never get cent out of Mrs. John Mar
tin, for she has nothing, but that Mrs. Henry
Martin (the defendant, May z. Martin mean
ing) has the coin, you had better stand in with
her, for she Will pay you WE'LL" saying to said
Jurors also, "that Mrs. Henry Martin had given
purse of money to divide among the jurors.
That after such and other statements several
of the jurors by said defendants, Pond and
Rodgers, and On the day and evening before the
trial closed, said defendants, Pond and Rodgers,
delivered, and caused TO be delivered, to GER
tain of said jurors Jurors Cody and WamboId
excepted) coin ain twenty-dollar pieces" in
large qantities, the exact amount plaintiff does
not know, but several hundred dollars TO some
OF the ten, and tnat Oy reason of such corrup-
ton and bribery verdict was rendered in
favor of said defendant, May S. Martin, and
against said plaintiff.
After some further allegations to the
same effect the plaintiff begs that the
verdict in the will case be set aside, and
that judgment be entered against E. B.
Pond, Arthur Rodgers and May S. Mar
tin for $250000 damages on account of the
fraud and oppression practiced toward
and damages sustained by plaintiff.
Mrs. Martin spoke freely on the case and
she reviewed the personnel of the Jury
with significant and characteristic fervor.
"The foreman of that jury" said the
lady, "was ALI Rulofson, an employe of
Baker & Hamilton, and Henry Barman is
also an employe of the same firm, with
which the defendant, E. B. Pond, is con-
nected in large land deal.
1.-The greater part of that jury" contin-
ued Mrs. Martin, "were saloonmen. and
Jeremiah hurley, one of that body, served
III the Assessors Office when Pond was
IN Office. Haley, the County Clerk at that
time, was friend of Pond and permitted
the latter and Arthur Rodgers to take
Henry Martins second will from his office.
and Mr.. Buckenfeldt had it in his possess
sion for over thirty nights without a
deputy.
at may be a matter of interest to the
public to know that three of Mrs. Henry
Martins witnesses have died since the
trial. Sargent, superintendent of the
Brown Bear mine, was found dead in his
room at the Grand Hotel. He had passed
that evening with young Pond and Mrs.
Henry Martin. He died. added Mrs
John, bitterly, with his boots on
There is man named Thomas Clark,
now serving a term in the State prison,
who thoroughly described Pond while on
the witness-stand as the man who en-
ployed him to visit my house and take
therefrom any papers that bore Henry
Martins name.
u am not prompted by malice or
revenge, but simply want justice for my
child. My life has been devoted to the
welfare of my two boys and I do not de-
sire TO live unless can prove the validity
of Henry Martins will. Life to me with
out the respect and honor of my kind is
valueIess."
Mrs. Martin insinuated that she had
some very important evidence which she
would produce when the present case
comes to trial.