The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1895-08-24

were examined, and none of them were
proof against the challenges for cause.
Three attachments were issued for absent
ones, and one was afterward withdrawn.
The box was exhausted and 200 names or
dered, one half returnable on Monday
morning and the other on Tuesday. These
names were drawn from the County
Clerks trial box at II o'clock, making
total of 1850 that have been ordered in this
case. There now remain but thirty names
in the great box. in which there were
originally placed the names of 5000 citi-
zens subject to jury duty in the several
courts.
Judge Murphy took his seat promptly at
10 o'clock and the proceedings, which
lasted only an hour were begun.
The tin box delivered three names-A.
A. Son, ]. Schneider Jr., E. Emanuel.
Mr.. Son did not respond, and the name of
J. g. Buc hanan was called. An attach
ment was ordered for Mr. Son and the
novelty of $50 bail fixed. The order for
the attachment was later withdrawn.
J. Schneider Jr. said be could not convict
on circumstantial evidence. Z. Emanuel
said he had formed and still retained an
opinion as to the guilt or innocence of the
defendant. j. G. Buchanan declared that
roll. So these three were quickly excused
and another two quickly called into the
box. They were excused, as were the
others that followed until the names in
the box were exhausted.
S. w. Cowels said he had an opinion
which hecould not lay aside. He was ex-
cused on the challenge OF the State.
F. Gerkin said he had formed very
strong opinion, which could not be easily
removed. lie was excused
A. Sinsheimer answered the questions of
the State and was accepta be but the opin-
ion he had formed caused him to be chal-
lenged by the defense. He was excused.
M. A. Wolf also said he had an opinion,
which excused him from service.
E. w. Daniel after answering the ques-
tons of the State promptly and satisfac-
torily was dismissed by the defense. He
had strong opinion.
J. M. Lyons said he had an opinion for
o long time, though not wholly based on
the reading OF the testimony and news
paper stories. He had used his own judg-
ment somewhat in the matter. He was
excused.
S. Friedman said he would be willing to
join in verdict of guilty where the pen
atty is death, and that he had no prejudice
against circumstantial evidence. But he
had formed an opinion and was excused.
P. Farst said he was conscientiously OPP
cused him from duty.
L. Kahn stated that he had an opinion
which must be met with very strong evil
dence. He was excused.
G. Felt declared that he could not con-
Wet on circumstantial evidence. He was
challenged by the State and excused.
j. Holland was called, but he had been
excused till Monday, owing to the demand
for his presence as party to a civil suit in
another court.
c. M. Delano was excused by the State
because he said that he would not join in
verdict on circumstantial evidence where
the penalty might be death.
HI. Klindt declared that he had no scru-
pies against the death penalty and if the
circumstantial evidence was strong enough
he could convict. He said he had read
part of the testimony and at one time he
thought he had an opinion and believed he
had it new. He was challenged by the
State and excused.
M. ]. Henley said he had conscientious
scruple against the death penalty and was
excused by the State.
Andrew Forman Jr. said if he thought
circumstantial evidence was strong enough
he could convict in a case where death was
the penalty He said he had followed the
case and had an opinion. He was excused
r A. Taussig objected to the oath and
was affirmed to do his duty were he chosen,
but as he said he was opposed to capital
punishment he was promptly excused by
the State.
B. +. Wombold said he could not join in
verdict of guilty where the penalty might
be death on circumstantial evidence, and !
he was excused by the State.
Z. V. Kelly said he could convict on cir
cumstantial evidence where the penalty
might be death. He said he had no ac-
quaintance with Durrant or any one con-
nected with the case. He appeared to be
a satisfactory juror until he said he had
formed an opinion, and that excused him.
M. Newfield said he would be willing to
find verdict on circumstantial evidence
where the penalty might be death, but
he had formed an opinion ana could not
become a good juror. He was excused.
A. J. Cove said circumstantial evidence
would have to prove to him beyond rea-
sonable doubt the guilt of the defendant
before he could convict. He said he had
formed an opinion which he could not
avoid. having read the testimony and the
stories of the case. He was allowed to go.
At the next turn of the box the names of
S. L. Goldstein and S. Friedman came out.
Naithar rocaondod apd OFT nh ~, ,fc x,yore