The San Francisco call., 1896-10-11
BRIBERY CHARGES
STOP A CASE
Jurors Indignant at At
torney Sullivan's Accu-
sationS.
Charges in a Well Known
Damage Suit Against the
Southern Pacific.
ARRESTS WERE NOT MADE
A Lawsuit Stopped Because Attor
neys Thought a Corporation Had
Bribed Jurors.

There was considerable excitement in
legal circles yesterday over the publica-
ton of Attorney Matt Sullivan's state
ment, made in Judge Daingerfeld's court
on Friday, to the effect that two jurors,
presumably John F. Sweeny and John
Heanv, had been guilty of illegal conduct
in the damage suit of Anthony Quill
against the Southern Pacific Railroad
Company for $50, 600 for the death of his
daughter, May, who was killed by the
Berkeley local train at Dwight station last
February.
Before the jury was discharged by
Judge DaIngerfeld, Attorney Sullivan,
who represented the plaintiff, stated to
the court that at least two jurors in the
case were under evil influences. being un-
der suspicion OF having accepted brlbes
from the defendant.
Jurvmen Heany and Sweeny were
pointed at defiantly, and the attorney an
nounced that he had been watching them
closely and had had detectives on their
tracks. So positive was he in his asser-
tions that Attorney Ackerman, represent
ing the railway company, agreed with
the plaintiffs attorney that the case be
dismissed, and this was done, greatly
against the wishes of the Judge, who held
that the verdict ought to be filed and that
exceptions, if any, be taken thereupon.
Attorney Sullivan had his detectives
busy in the case all day yesterday, and he
said last night:
1--WE have found that Sweeny was fore
man in the Lombard Loan case against
Whelan, and we have found a man named
Crawford mixed up in this case. Isaacs
and Crawford are the names of two men
we are watching and positive steps against
them and others may be begun at any
moment"
The accused men Indignantly repel the
charges made ana threaten to sue those
who made them for damages.
E. Isaacs, who was day before yesterday
the subject of the sensational charge OF
tampering with the jury in the guile
damage suit against the railroad COM
pany, makes vigorous denial and threatens
q damage sun. He is joined in his
denial by Juryman John F. Sweeny, who
says that he and Juryman Heany had in
fact voted for the plaintiff in the jury
room.
1.-THE charge is absurdIy false" says Mr..
Isaacs. | was in the company of Mr..
Sweeny every day during the progress of
the case but that was natural and was
only because Mr.. Sweeny and l have been
intimate personal friends and daily asso-
clates for years.
"Mr. Sweeny was drawn on the jury in
Judge Daingertields s court several months
ago, and up to about week ago / was
Juror in Judge Trnutt's court. During
that time Mr.. Sweeny and l went to and
from the City Hall together every day as
friends, but we never conversed about the
jury-room. When my service was ended,
! frequently went to the courtroom, where
my friend was serving, going out of Curl
osity and as anybody might do under such
circumstances.
1T is an absurd mistake and the remarks
made by Attorney Matt l. Sullivan, as he
pointed me out in court were an unjust
and cruel attack on my character and with
out the slightest foundation, except the
mistaken suspicious of the lawyer. I have
been well known here for thirty-five years.
and it is the first time my character was
ever attacked. can refer to many of the
best merchants and other citizens of the
City as to my integrity, and l think my
character will compare bly, with that
of Matt Sallivan, or any other Sullivan. 1
am no hireling of the railroad, Matt Sulli-
van, or any corporation"
al wish to deny all the charges made bv
Sullivan as wholly false,' said Mr..
Sweeny yesterday. "The best evidence
of this is the fact that Mr.. Heaney and
myself, the ones he CHARGED were being
tampered with, both voted in the Jury
room for the plaintiff throughout, aud if
it had not been for our stand the Jury
would positively have given a verdict for
the railroad. In any event the damages
would not have been large, as many
thought they would be before they heard
the evidence. My verdict was given fairly
and impartially and in accordance with
the courts instructions to the Jury Mr..
Isaacs knew nothing of my mind in the
case, as we never conversed on it, and Mr..
Sullivan must realize now that he discoy-
cred a mares nest. His outDurst on Mr..
Heaney and myself was terrific and
wholly unjustified."