The record-union., 1897-12-29
The Supreme Court Decides Ad-
versely to Thee. Durrant.
Unanimously Denies the Application for a
Writ Of Probable Cause.
The Contempt Case of Horace
Smyth, One of the Jurors Who
Convicted Durrant Of the Mur-
der of Blanche Lamont, Comes
Up for Hearing Before Judge
Wallace of the Superior Court.

SAN FRANCISCO. Dec. 2S.--Late
this afternoon the Supreme Court, Of
ter having heard the matter argued in
chambers, denied the application of the
attorneys for w. II. j.. Durrant, the
condemned murderer of Blanche La
mont. for a writ of probable cause
II was contended by Durranrs coun-
sci that Judge Bahrs erred in having
fixed the date for the execution of their
client within less than sixty days after
the date upon which he was recommit-
ted to the custody Of the Warden of
San Quentin Prison. The Supreme
Court, however, after hearing the points
relied upon for reversal, denied the Pc
1ition unanimously.
THE CASE OF JUROR SMYTH.
SAN FRANCISCO, Dec. 2S.-Horace
Smyth, the juror IN the Durrant case.
appeared in Judge Wallace's court this
morning in response to citation 10
show cause why he should not he pun
ished for contempt of court
The citation was issued upon the atfi-
davit of w A. Durrant. the father OF
the condemned man, and charges that
juror Smyth admitted to various peo-
pie that his verdict was based upon
ial sanction. The affidavit stated that
Smyth had told several reputable citi-
zens that his verdict of guilty was
based upon statements of shocking i'm
morality on the part of Durrant-
Smyth was represented by Attorney
H. +. Highton, while General Dicllin-
son and w. w. Foote represented Dur
rant.
After General Dickinson had stated
the matter before the court. District
Attorney Barnes moved that the pro-
ceedings be dismissed. on the ground
that it was criminal contempt arising
out of a criminal case, and all prosecu-
tions arising should be in the hands of
the public prosecutor He cited the
case OF Durant vs. Washington County,
Ia, decided by the United States Su-
preme Court.
a long argument followed.
Attorney Joseph c. Campbell of the
firm Of Reddy, Campbell & Metson, was
called to the witness stand, and Attor-
ney Highton objected to the introduc-
ton of any evidence, on the same
ground as stated in his objections to
the petition.
Mr.. Foote examined the witness, who
modestly admitted that he was a law
yer He had met Mr.. Smyth at the
Merchants Club in the presence of Mr..
Metson and Holland Smyth.
Mr. Campbell testified to the effect
that during the course of the meal he
and Smyth discussed the Dulrant case,
and the latter said that Durrant was a
monster, who should have been convict
ed on general principles. He related
several disgusting details in support of
his assertion. which he said he had
heard during the trial.
Ex-Judge A. A. Sanderson testified
that in a conversation with Smyth at
a well-known restaurant, subsequent
TO the delivery of the verdict. the de-
fendant had told him the stories al
ready repeated by Campbell, in order
TO prove to the witness that Durrant
was an inhuman monster but he would
not swear that Smyth had claimed to
have heard the accusations before the
trial closed.
District Attorney Barnes testified
that no such testimony as had been
limited at in the present action had
been referred to during the trial.
Attorney w. II. Metson corroborated
the testimony of his partner, ]. c.
Campbell. regarding the statements
made at the Merchants Club. He was
certain Smyth had claimed to have
heard the stories during the trial of the
case.
Juror Smyth was called and denied
emphatically all the allegations In the
affidavit of the elder Durrant, on which
he had been cited for contempt
Several sharp questions of Attorney
Foote nettled him. and during a heated
controversy Judge Wallace adjourned
court until tomorrow.