The record-union., 1896-07-22
GRAHAM'S TRIAL STILL ON.
Il Looks as If Il Would Consume the
Entire Week.
What Various Witnesses Testified to
Concerning the Affair
Yesterday.

Iic lildl VI IlOIIletS CAdi 5CA
with malicious mischief in defacing
house that was being painted by the
Sullivan-Kelly Company was resumed
yesterday IN the Police Court.
A. S. Baker, the foreman of the COM
pany, resumed his testimony He testi-
fed that, besides Graham, he had
quarrel with painter named Penn and
discharged him last spring. He had not
had quarrels with number of other
painters named by A. M. Seymour, Gra-
; hams counsel.
long and tedious cross examination
ensued, in which very little was elected,
while objections to questions were as
thick as blackberries in July.
f. K. Dixon testified that Graham was
employed by the company and they
worked together just before Grahams
discharge When Graham was dis
charged he abused Baker soundly, and
told him the firm was no good and he
would get even with them yet. He did
not say how he would get even.
i The doors and drawers which were
| defaced in both the houses were pro-
drced in evidence, and identified by the
witness, who said he discovered the in
| jury done when he went to work on the
Sd. Everything was in, good condition
when he left the house the night before
and the writing was not there.
| Mr.. Sprague, counsel for the defense,
! asked the court to instruct the counsel
| for the prosecution not to have any
| conversation with the witness during
| the noon hour, but the court said he
had no right to issue any such orders.
| Frank Heffernan testified that he was
painter by trade, and was acquainted
with Baker and Graham. He heard the
| quarrel between the two men, and his
version was substantially the same as
that of other witnesses. Baker offered
Graham certain wages for doing grain
| ing, but the latter refused to do it and
| Baker told him he had better quit.
| w. j. Riehl held several conversations
with Graham after his discharge, and
the latter said he would do Baker up
| He was going to lay for him. He also
| said that the painters should go in a
body to Sullivan-Kel1y and say they
would not work for the firm any longer
with Baker as foreman. Witness said
| he was very we'll satisfied as things
were. He met Graham on the night of
the outrage and the latter said he had
| just come up from San Francisco.
| Witness was prejudiced against Baker
| when he first went to work for him,
| but as soon as he learned his disposition
he got along with him all right.
| f. P. Woodward testified that he was
a painter by profession, knew Graham
and at one time had difficulty with him
and had threatened to take him down
an alley and give him his deserts. I'm
der cross-examination he admitted that
the relations between them was still
slightly strained, but that as long as
| Graham desisted from doing what had
in the first place caused the difficulty,
he would refrain from bothering him.
| Shortly after the commission Of the
l.acts of vandalism he met Graham in a.
saloon and had his attention called to
the fact that the latter was greatly agi-
tated, pale and trembling. This had to
a certain extent aroused his suspicion,
and when at the subsequent meeting of
the Progressive Brotherhood of Painters
and Decorators Of the State of Califor-
MIA, No. 3, it had been agreed to attempt
as body to hunt down the perpetrators
Of this outrage-and he (WoodwarD had
been appointed Chairman of a commit
tee Of three who were to confer with the
members of the firm of Sullivan. Kelly
& Co., and act in conjunction with their
instructions, che had mentioned the fact
| of Graham's marked agitation. Since
then man named Long had informed
him that they had the right man.
Since that" interrupted ex-senator
Sprague, this man Long has been taken
| down an alley and given his deserts,
| ard in consequence is at present in re-
| tirement at the hospital, is he not?"
That / can't say" was the answer.
| Continuing. the witness said that Ora
hams most intimate friend had made a
motion at the meeting Of the union that
II the perpetrator could be discovered
he be branded throughout the State and
not be allowed to work in any first-class
shop in the State.
In answer to question witness stated
that there were several degrees of in
toxication and ne defined them by say
ing when he couId walk without bump
ing against passers by he was all right.
When he started on the sidewalk and
took the whole road he was jagged. but
when he fell down he was dead off. At
| the close of a severe cross examination
| a subpoena was issued for Long. and
after the examination of minor witness
the case was continued until 10 a. m.
sharp to-day.
|
4