The San Francisco call., 1896-11-21
THE GRAND JURY
WAS CHALLENGED
Bias. and Prejudice Charged
in the Indictment of
Marriott.
Robert Haight's Explanation of
a Jocular Conversation on
the Street.
Members of the Jury Testified That
They Were Governed by Motives
of Honesty and Justice.

The Grand Jury Yesterday listened to
statement from Police Judge Conlan and
Immediately ignored charges brought
against him by MFR. Lubbock, client OF At
torney Lowenthai. Lubbock was lolted on
the hand by a revolver in the hands of one
Nathan. The case was taken to Judge
Conlan's court and postponed four times.
1t was on the calendar to be called last Sat-
urday, but the matter was brought to the
attention of the Grand Jury the day be-
fore. When it was called up in court the
day after Lubbock and Lowenthal were oe-
<fore the Grand Jury the latter asked for
another postponement. Judge Conlan
stated TO the jury that the case was post
poned twice by consent of both parties;
postponed the third time because it was
set without the consent of the court for
special hour which interfered with other
business; aud postponed the fourth time
by request of the complaining witness. In
view OF this statement, verified by the
record, the Grand Jury fully exonerated
Judge Conlan.
The Grand Jury was summoned to Judge
Daingerheld's court to answer certain
questions. In the case of the People vs.
Fred Marriott for libeling Judge Hebbard,
the defendant moved for dismissal of the
proceedings on the ground that certain
members of the Grand jury were governed
by bias and prejudice in finding the indct-
ment- Thirteen jurors accused of preju-
dice were called. Mr.. Darwin represented
the defendant. Julius Kahn and Assistant
District Attorney Peixotto asked questions
for the people.
Juror Robert Haights examination was
amusing. 1t seems that he met Percy
Goldstone in front of the Spreckels build
ing last Thursday and in an off-hand fash
Joni i'm parted to that young man his views
a ina hall md ho Nf
punishment which should be meted out TO
newspaper offenders. He was not aware
then that the youth with whom he was
talking was an attache of the Newsletter
the paper whose editor was indicted for
libel on Judge Hebbard.
Mr.. Haight, replying to questions pro-
pounded by Ben Darwin, said: 81 do not
know the defendant, not even by sight.
did not say that any newspaper man
ought to be sent to San Quentin. Did not
say that any newspaper man who would
libel Judge Hebbard ought to be sent TO
State prison. Yes; / had a conversation
in front of the Spreckels building with
Percy Goidstone, but Judge Hebbard' s
name was not mentioned. Ihad jocular
conversation with Goldstone. He said to
me, Why did you indict my boss?' and
replied: He ought to have been killed
instead of indicted.' 1t was a jocular con-
versation.
Darwin-To whom did you refer when
Haight-Why, the newspaper man.
Mr.. Haight, resuming the narrative of
his talk with Goldstoae testified:
"l said q newspaper had no more right
than an individual to assail private char
acter. Yes, l said l had once been at
tackled in the Chronicle, and 1 regarded
the crime of libel as next TO that OF MUIR
der"
Darwin-Did you not say that man
should be sent to prison thousand years
for libel?
Haight-I do not remember having
made such statement.
Darwin-Did you not say that Judge
Hebbard ought to have taken a gun?
Haight-What / said was that if I was
on a jury | would not vote to convict a
man.who had killed a newspaper man be-
cause OF libel.
Replying 10 questions by Mr.. Peixotto
the witness said:
In finding the Indictment I was guided
only by the evidence. l did not know the
defendant"
Juror C. c. Burr testified that he had no
pre- judice against the defendant
Dafwin-Did not the News Letter some
years ago expose you in regard to baking
powder?
Burr-This is the first have heard of it.
l did not know ii. 1t is all news TO me.
thought only of public justice in voting ON
the Indictment.
NE did not know the defendant person
ally. He was guided by desire to attain
Justice. 81 never had any prejudice
against the Newsletter. 1 never adj
mired the paper particularly, but that
would not impel me TO indict the editor
without cause"
William +. Mau, II. s. Hagan, E. P.
farnsworth, M. Spiro, Frederick Hobbs,
David B. Faktor, A. Z. Drucker and Fred
erick W. Zehius testified that they bad no
bias or prejudice against the defendant.
Mr.. Darwin did not argue the motion
10 dismiss on the ground of Grand Jury
bias, and Judge Daingerfeld at once
denied the motion.
After the incident in Judge Danger
fields court the Grand Jury went TO
Judge Siack's court and filed indictments
.for perjury against J. +. Smith and Paul
A. Ayhens. These refer TO the election
cases, and are not new indictments in a
proper sense, but are former indictmen; IS
amended in order to avoid technical OBJ
lection in she Superior Court.
For an hour prior to adjournment the
jury considered a mum Der of propositi ons,
and sent communication to the Board OF
Supervisors.
One topic under consideration was the
inadequate facilities for extinguishing
fires on the water front. 1t is said that the
Underwriters are serene in the belief
that the freboats are properly manned
and equipped as an auxiliary of the regu-
lar Fire Department. when the fact is tnat
the boats are not serviceab.e owing to 8
controversy between the Chief OF the Fire
Department and the Harbor Commits
sioners. Several members of the Grand
Jury entertain the opinion that the Har-
Dor Commissioners are in the wrong. In
order to secure adequate protection an
effort will be made 10 adjust the differ.
ences.
The Grand Jury will hold a special ses-
sion next Wednesday afternoon. There
is rumor to the effect that the jury will
inquire concerning the value of land on
Mission street, on which it is proposed &c
erect Hinh School