The San Francisco call., 1897-05-12
SOME HOT
\ SHOT FOR
HEBBARO
He Attempts to Stifs Free
Speech and Suppress
Eacts.
A MEMORY OF A DIVORCE
CONTEST.
Mr.. Shortridge Proves Flagrant
Violation of Law by a
Judge.
PADDOCK PLACED ON THE
BOOKS.
Jadge Daingerfeld Lets Drop a Bit
of Law on the Subject of Libel.
ing Candidates.
Mr.. Shortridge Proves Flagrant
Violation of Law by a
Judge.
PADDOCK PLACED ON THE
BOOKS.
Judge Daingerfisld Lets Drop Bit
of Law on The Subject of Libel.
ing Candidates.

1t is not strictly libel to say that po-
p, litical candidate for Judge is disgrace to
the bench unless the assertion is qualified
as to detail. Editor Marriott's attorney
was endeavoring to shed some light on
j. c. B. Hebbards past record yesterday
in order that the jury might know why
the newspaper man expressed an opinion
of candidate last campaign, and the fore.
going bit of law dropped from Judge Dain
gerfeld's lips to close the incident.
Among other things Marriott m ade the
disgrace to the bench" remark about
Hebbard, in addition to accusing him OF
being more or less responsible for the
losses suffered by the depositors of the
Peoples Home Savings Bank, and Attor-
ney Shortridge was for rehearsing various
actions Of Hebbard to justify his clients
opinions. There was, for instance, little
affair in connection with the suit brought
by George White, the Mendocino cattle
king, against his wife for divorce some two
years ago. Hebbard it was who heard the
case, and the lawyer was for showing, by
Attorney Barclay Henley, what he termed
a fragrant violation of the law" on the
part OF Hebbard in the case. There was
among the witnesses one John II. Rohrer,
who was fined $780, with sentence of five
rer made his peace by producing the cash,
which in due course of law went into the
County treasury. Hebbard saw fit, how
ever, according to TIE attorney, to order
the money refunded to his clerk, Bob
Fitzgerald, who IN turn handed it to one
OF the attorneys in the case.
The moment Henley was asked TO re-
late the details OF the incident Hebbard's
lawyers ground out regular hand organ
scale of protests.
Mr.. Shortridge, in explaining the OBJ
ject of the evidence. said it was one of
several facts he wished to lay pefore the
Jury in order that they might know some
" of the grounds for Marriott's opinion OF a
political candidates merits for office.
1--WE propose TO follow this evidence" be
continued, 'by offering the court records
in the case. We wish to show that this
$500 was paid into the public treasury, and
that while there, beyond the reach OF any
court, especially Judge Hebbard's court,
we will prove that he issued an order,
contrary to law, directing the money TO
be returned to his court, and that it was
then paid over TO one of the attorneys in
the case. We are charged with saying that
this Judge disgraced and disgraces the
bench he occupies. We wish, in proof OF
this statement, to show that he reflects
the highest discredit and the highest dis
honor on his position.
In this case, under the indictment
against Mr.. Marriott. we are not confined
TO small details. We are permitted to
prove the facts that led to people holding
opinions derogatory to Judge Hebpari.
If some citizen should declare that min
lister OF the gospel disgraced the pulpit and
be charged with libel therefor, that citizen
would have right to lay before a Jury
the facts which warranted such slate
ments. In other words. if a minister is
false to his calling and to morals these
are facts that could be presented TO Jury.
'1f it be so that Judge of the Superior
Court. with wide jurisdiction, ordered
man to pay fine into the county treas.
ury and then withdrew it to put it into
the pockets of one of the attorneys il
ought TO be made public. Such en- act is
not only illegal it is in the highest
degree reprehensibe. The man who says
This Judge disgraces the bench has a
right to put this fact before jury. Here
is citizen who for expressing his opinion
of a political candidate is brought into
court and is asked to justify it. Ii it be