The San Francisco call., 1897-12-16
which reports of Deuprey's words do not
ecord
The paragraphs are as follows:
Documents Filed


That your affiant hereby respectflIly objects
10 any procedure being had or takan by the
SAID Judge B mrs OF said Superior Court 70 I
the reason lhat as your afliant is informed
ana pelleves the said Hon. u. II. Bahrs pu b.
llshed IN a newspaper over his signature pub
Iished aud circulated in the CITY and county
OF San Francisco, criticising the action of the
supreme Court of the State of Cali
tornia in issuing certificate of proba-
pie cause upon the appeal taken in be-
nat OF your affiant from the alleged
judgment or order Of said George II. Bahrs,
sentencing your afiant 10 be execu ed al a
GATE on or about two days from the date OF the
ailegeu judgment or reseutence OF your
hmant ana that your afiant is informed and
believes that the said Hon. George H. Bahrs
has a personal and biuer prejudice and is
biased against your affiani, and that. as your
hfhant ! informed and believes, is not dis
posed TO listen, by reason of his bias and pre-
lGdlce, 10 any application on behalf of your
aInahi, or 10 give any consideration to any
argument or arguments of counsel on behalf
OF your affIanL That, by reason OF said con-
sldera ions OF The rights, privileges and inter
ests OF your aiiiant under the constitution OF
fornla, he VIII be and has been denied OF the
rights and privileges vested IN MIN.
Duprey's Words.
That your afiant is informed and believes
that 1t IS but proper and but Just that in order
that the attorneys for your affant should be
fully and fairly heard in regard TO all motions
IN his behalf, that there should be proper as
slEnment 10 another department where the
same can De neard ana the attorneys Tor your
aihant can be fully presented in the form OF
their applications and the same have hear
ing IN accordance with an important under
standing in the premises; and your afiiant IS
informed and believes this application should
De taken to anorher depar tment Tor the pur-
pose of hearing the application on behalf OF
yonr ah1ant solely for the purpose that all
matters on his behalf presented may be finally
adJudicated and considered without any pos
lDilliy OF question as to the absolute impair
TALLY OF the dispositions of all the applca-
tO0S that be ho0 his hpEq1f " q II
due respect, II your Honor please.
Judge Bahrs declares that the differ
ences in the two atfiiavits amount to a
tam pering with the record. ~ would not
have minded" he said, "had the docu-
ment filed been read to me, for then l
could have corrected the statements from
the bench, for they are not true. But, if
allow that to 20 in without question, it
will stand as uncOntradicted in the record.
am going 10 make 1t part of the record
which will go to the Supreme Court
The whole affidavit has been changed,
but those last paragraphs l particularly
objected 10. That last page was evidently
inserted alter the others were made Gp; il
looks like different paper and different
ink; it must have been inserted after the
affidavit was read in court and before il
was filed with the clerk. Mr.. Deuprey
said IL had not vet been completed, and
he was allowed lime IN which to prepare
II properly.
Il will not let it pass unnoticed. but |
hardly think l will jeopardize the main
case by bringing proceedings. After the
case is tinis aed. however" and further
tEan that the JUDI would not say. lie is
very indignant over the matter and
trouble is likely TO follow.
Deuprey explains the circumstance in
this way: Il had not time TO draw up The
affidavit properly so | dictated il from
notes 10 my stenographer. l explained to
the court that 1t was not quite Ieady and
that l would file the perfected document
later | then read the affidavit from the
same notes | used in debating to my type
writer. If there was anything IN the doc
ument h!ed which did not mention in
court il is because l overlooked it while
reading TO the Judge"
Judge BanIs has a transcript from the
notes of two stenographers and he prom
ises trouble FOR some one.