The San Francisco call., 1897-04-09
FAST NEARING
THE GALLOWS
The Supreme Court Refuses
Durrant a Writ of
Error.
He Was Very Anxious to Take
the Case to the Highest
Tribunal.
Gains Made Ttat the Murderer Did
Not Have Fair ami I'm.
partial Trial.

The attorneys for Durrant, the murderer
OF Blanche Lamont, made another in
effectual effort yesterday to save their
client from the galiows. They petitioned
Chief Justice Beatty of the State Supreme
Court for writ of error. in order that
they night carry the case to the Supreme
the final judgment of the Supreme Court
OF California, rendered last week.
OF course, the appellant had to show
that his rights under United States laws
had not been protected. The effort yester-
day was to show that Durrant had not
been tried by fair and impartial Jury,
and that two of the City newspapers had
done much to prejudice the public in gen.
eral against the defendant when he was
on trial.
The petition was based on these
grounds: That Durrapt, on May 29, 1895,
was arraigned in the Superior Court of
San Francisco on a charge of murder. On
July IAN alleged trial was entered upon
seeking to obtain a jury for the trial. of
the petitioner. The jury was obtained
over the objections of the defendant, and
that the jury selected was not impartial,
as required by law, and that the mode of
trial by such jury was in direct violation
of Article vi of the amendments to the
constitution OF the United States, wherein
it is provided that I'm all criminal prose
cutions the accused shall en- 10y the right
of speedy and public trial by an impair
tial jury of the State and district wherein
the crime shall have been committed,
ETC." and also in violation of article of
the same laws, which provides that mo
person shall be deprived of life, liberty or
property without due process of law"
Also that the lists of selection by the Su-
perior Court OF talesmen wherefrom to Sc
lect jury under the provisions of section
204, G. G. p, was direct violation of Sec
tion IL, article l, of the constitution of the
State OF California, and thereby q direct
violation OF the provisions of article V and
article VI of the amendments 10 the
United States constitution.
The petition states that application
was made for a change OF venue on July
25, at he could not secure a fair and i'm
partial jury In San Francisco. This too,
was denied, he claims, in violation of the
same amendments. On August efforts
were made to have the editors of the Ex-
aminer and Chronicle punished for con-
tempt Tor publishing articles prejudicial
to the defendant, and action on this was
postponed and was never acted upon by
the court.
In referring to the jury the petitioner
de clared that Jurors Crocker and Nathan
were not impartial, to his injury. In con.
clusion he asks that writ of error be
granted and that a stay of proceedings be
ordered IN the case until the final determi-
nation of the cause.
Chief Justice. Beatty lost but little time
in considering the petition, which he dis
missed in this way:
This petition for a writ of error is denied
1t does not appear that any rights secured to
the Pentoner by the constitution or laws Of
the United States have been denied or vio-
lated, and no such question is presented by
the record BEATTY, C. J.
April 8. 1897.
1t is understood that the prisoners at
torneys have not given up the fight yet,
but propose to appeal to the United
States Supreme Court.