The San Francisco call., 1896-11-24
WILLIAMS MUST
MAKE A DEFENSE
Judge Daingerfield Refused
to Instruct the Jury
to Acquit.
Witnesses Tell of the Circular
That Criticized Judge
Hebbard.
Mysterious Order for Printing Thou
sands of the Document-Array
of Legal Talent.

Lawyers, witnesses, jurors and inter-
ested spectators th-onged Judge Danger
fields courtroom yesterday TO participate
in the opening of the trial of Thomas S.
Williams Jr.. who was indicted by the
Grand Jury on a charge of libeling Judge
Hebbard during the recent political cam
paign.
Judge Hebbard was a candidate for re-
election and Williams was one of his most
active opponents. In company with
several others, all depositors in the de-
funct Home Savings Bank, he issued a
circular charging Judge Hebbard with
being an unfair man in handling the
affairs OF the bank, alleging that he un-
justly dealt with the depositors, that he
allowed excessive compensation to John
+. Sheeian as receiver and manager of
the depleted Institution, and that he per-
mitted Attorney James Aiva Watt to
draw exorbitant fees for legal services.
When court opened Judge Hebbard was
seated with District Attorney Barnes, and
while the selection of the jury was going
on he displayed much activity in
scrutinizing the names drawn from the
box and in suggesting questions during
the examination of the talesmen. w. w.
Foote and julius Kahn are associated
represented by Henley & Costello, George
w. Baker, Crittenden Thornton and
Charles B. Darwin.
District Attorney Barnes, when inouir-
ing into kthe qualifications of proposed
Jurors, was careful TO ascertain whether
any OF them are acquainted or friendly
with Judge Hebbard, John F. Sheehan.
Alvinza Hayward, Rolla V. Watt, James
Cross, James Alva Watt, George Stone.
Henry Eickhoff, jeremiah Lynch or w
L. Baggett, 1t being understood that the
acts of those gentlemen in connection
with the wrecked bank will be closely scru-
tlnized during the trial
Following are the names of the Jurors
| impaneled to try the case: John d. Rob-
ertson. John Riordan, I. r. Horton, John
| NJ. Donlon, Adolph Packsher, Orrin Bal
| ley, Meyer Cahen, Alfred Eslen, Charles
NJ. Christopher. M. II. Gaffney, John
Percy, John M. Mehrtens.
| Thomas Curtin, a detective, testified
| that he has known Williams for sixteen
years. He met Williams in his tailor
| store few days before the last election.
| he went into the store to have a suit OF
clothes fitted. While he was putting on
a coat Williams handed him a COPY of the
| circular on which the charge of libel is
based. The witness did not see any other
copies of the circular. At this point a
| copy of the circular was introduced in ev
idence and identified by the witness.
Mr.. Curtin said that when he first went
into Mr.. Williams store they began to
| talk about the clothes, and soon after he
| handed the circular to the witness. who
| said he read it and remarked that il was
pretty hot stuff. To this MCCARTHY repIied
| that there was something more coming
| that more circulars were being printed.
! Mr.. Curtin admitted that he was subse-
quently employed TO do some service in
| the case. He was employed by Henry
Eickhoff, and some of his (Curfin's 81 en-
ployes shadowed Williams after the print
ing of the circular.
On cross-examination Attorney Barclay
Henley secured an admission by Mr.. Cur
tin that he was not sure that the circular
introduced in evidence was the same as
| the one shown him by Mr.. Williams. He
had not read over the paper Just SUBJ
| mitted to him, but from what examina-
ton he had made he thought the two
documents were identical. He would not
| undertake to repeat the substance of the
charge against Judge Hebbard, beyond
the fact that it said the Judge had ap-
pointed John f. Sheehan receiver of the
bank, for which the latter had drawn
down $500 a month. He explained that
Mr.. Williams refused to let him lake the
| circular, saying that 1t was the only copy
he had.
Frank Cowles, a tailor, testified tbs
Williams handed him four copies of the
circular on October 81, telling him to dis
tribute them among his friends.
Attorney Henley objected on the
ground that this related to the 9th of
October. whereas the indictment was
found on October "a. This objection was
overruled.
ibid Mr.. Williams tell you ANYTHING
bout the printing of the circular2n ask ed
Mr.. Foote.
The witness answered: "Williams told
me that he had a few of the circulars
printed and that somebody else got in and
got lot more printed, something like
10000 or $1,000, be didn't know exactly
which,"
This was regarded as important by the
friends of Judge Hebbard as it is intended
to make further inquiry as to the iden-