The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1897-05-04

Yet His Court Took No Move
to Correct fragrant
Abuses.
Attorney Shortridge Pulls Chestnuts
From the Fire That Were Not
Relis he'd by the Prosecution.

Another piece of the story of the mis-
management OF the Peoples Home Savings
Bank was told yesterday in Judge Dain-
gerrield's court. Metaphorically speaking
it was link in the claim Attorney Samuel
NJ. Shortridge has promised to forge con-
Meeting Judge Hebbard with the actions
of John f. Sneehan as receiver of the in
stitution, and which would justify Editor
Marriott of the News Letter in expressing
the opinion that Hebbard was the "tooP'
and creature" of the ring in control OF
the assets of the bank.
Now, to 60 back nearly three years, in
June, 1894, there was much dissatisfac.
ton among the depositors over Sheehan' s
conduct of the bank. Indignation meet
ings were frequent, and the speakers did
not hesitate to express their mind IN very
emphatic and sarcastic terms about the
matter. At mass-meeting at which 1900
of the depositors in the defunct bank were
represented resolutions were adopted &C.
cusing Sheenan OF many mlsdemeanors,
among others of causing to be published
statements tending 10 pndervalue the
assets of the bank.
This action, it is said, caused many OF
the depositors to sell their bankbooks TO
spectators at a sacrifice, In fact, some
of the executive committee of the depos-
itors accused Sheehan of running little
speculative syndicate on his own account,
but that's another story, which may prob
ably be fully ventilated before the case is
concluded.
Now Sheeban was appointed by Judge
Hebbard, and in his capacity as receiver
of the bank was, as lawyers say, the serv-
ant of the court. Attorney Shortrldge
was endeavoring to show that the court
was ade aware of its servants shortcom-
ings. To do this he put Harrison D. Pike
on the stand to testify that as secretary of
the meeting he had forwarded a copy of
these resolutions, reciting Sheehan's mis-
conduct, to Judge Hebbard. That was
one of the links in the chain" Then, by
way of making good job of it. he asked
that copy of these resolutions be read to
the jury, and therein he stirred up Heb
bard 5 wrath.
Attorney Julius Kahn and Assistant
Prosecuting Attorney Hinkle performed
all sorts of legal gyrations in their efforts
to prevent the reading of those famous
resolutions. Judge Hebbard himself as
sisted in the fight.
The resolutions were typewriter and
of course very interesting reading. Judge
Daingerfeld was for putting Attorney
Shortridge 10 the iron bic of proving all
! facts reclted in them before they might
| be read. The lawyer was willing to do
| this if il took all summer Just to show
| that Judge Hebbard knew what Sheehan
| was doing, and how distasteful his actions
as receiver were to the depositors.
| Then there were arguments as to the
| weight of the resolutions as evidence, not
avoirdupois, but in the legal measure.
! This, according to Attorney Shortridge,
| fnr he I1r n n hai n
competency was first TO be determined, he
argued.
Then it was that Kahn invoked ad-
! journment. Shortridge managed, how
ever, to let the jury hear few OF the spicy
paragraphs the depositors adopted, and
| the wrangle will be resumed this morning.
incidentally, the evidence of Pike de-
! veloped that he had strong opinions con-
corning Judge Hebbard, much stronger
than Editor Marriott had expressed. Also
the proceedings developed phase of the
late political campaign, wherein Judge
Hebbard was hooted at a public meeting.
The resolutions were adopted at mass
meeting of tie depositors, and Pike, q.
| secretary, stated that he had forwarded a
copy of them to Judge Hebbard through
| the mail. The executive committee OF
seven, representing the depositors, had
! been for some time previously vainlv
struggling with Judge Hebbard to allow
| the old board of directors 10 resign, and
| the adoption of these resolutions was a
sort of forlorn hope. Still, they were in
| the nature of last appeal to the heart OF
| the court.
Attorney Shortridge then made formal
request to introduce the resolutions into
! the record and read them to the jury. At
| torney Kahn dramatically declared that
| the men who drafted them should have
been cited for contempt of court by Judge
| Hebbard for daring to criticize the actions
of Sheehan.
well, why didn't he do it?' queried
| Shortridge, but Kahn made a new tack
| He was for having all the acts recited in
| the resolutions proved by means of wit
nesses.
well, we'll do that in time, all right"
was the ready response of Attorney Short
ridge.
Judge Daingerfield asked if it was in
cum bent upon Judge He bbard to act in
accordance with the tenor of the resolu-
| tions
I'VE are not complaining that he did
act" said Shortridge, 'bnt that he did
not act and remove the receiver after he
was informed OF his misdoings. He re-
NAMED passive with the knowledge of
these facts before him, and We are sim ply
reciting these circumstances to bring
home to Judge HebDard his connection
! Win the ulatker
Then Judge Daingerfeld inquired if
Judge Hebbard had bsen asked to act in
the matter in court.
| He was informed that many people had
| appeared before Judge He bbard to request
him to modify his injunction restraining
the old board of directors from resigning
as they wished to, in order to make room
for other directors selected by the de-
positors.
/ Again Attorney Shortridge offered the
resolutions as evidence. He asked Judge
Daingerfield to read them, but the court
said the communication Gid not m axe it
incumbent upon Judge Hebbard to tax e
| official cogniZance of it.
These matters should be brought home
to Judge"
well, that's just what am doing" re-
| piled Shortridge.
Judge Daingerfield asked if application
had ever been made for Sheehan's re-
moval.
Yes; to remove the whole caboodle of
them before Judge Seawells court" was
the reply.
Now, granting that the receiver did
certain wrong things" continued Short
ridge, 1--WE must bring it home to the
knowledge of Judge Hebbard that's what
| we are doing The most hnpou+ La.