The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1897-04-20
he drew the indictment and felt great con-

he drew the indictment and felt great con-
fidence in it.
Mr.. Shortridge asked if there was not
point in the Indictment which caused him
10 pause and doubt.
After a slight hesitation Mr.. Barnes
said he supposed counsel referred to the
question as to whether the editorial in
question is really libelous per Sc.
Attorney Kahn m ade brief reply, and
the court overruled the defendants mo-
ton.
The names of the jurors in the box were
then read as follows: Charles w. WEIGH,
Thomas G. Taylor R. Ii. Woods, Charles
Kane, Adam Wagner, John G. Anderson,
A. NJ. Lawyer, Henry Klindt, James +.
Doriand. X. Gampltz, John ]. Engler.
District Attorney Barnes read the indict-
ment which sets forth the fact that last
October Mr.. Marriott published in his
paper, the San Francisco News Letter, an
editorial, OF which the followingis copy ::
WORTHY JUDGE FoRsooTHl
In another part of the News Letter appears
an article signed by committee OF the Peo-
pies II ONE Savings Bank depositors, showing
adequate cause why Judge Hebbard should
not be reelected. The statements made in
this terrible document viii cause every honest
man TO shrink from voting for a creature VIII o
Is therein clearly proven to be an enemy of
numerous widows and orphans, and morally
liable for the loss OF their little savings. Is
!
so. Intelligent men will learn well the lesson
that article teaches, and will see TO IT that he
Is removed from the high position he dis
eraces. II tools are 10 be elected TO the Judi
clar the honest men had better get out of
the City. But ii will be more natural for us to
relegate the tools to the oblivion they so richly
merit.
/ The publication OF this article. Mr..
Barnes explained, could not in any event
be regarded as anything more serious
than misdemeanor. If it could be shown
that the publication was unjust!fiable in a
legal way then a conviction of INSIDE
meanor would be asked for by the prose
| cution.
The article referred to as having ap-
peared ''ln another part Of the News Let
] ter" was issued by authority of the CON-
mittee of the Peoples Home Savings
Bank and read as follows:
AN APPEAL TO VOTERS
Your attention is called to the fact that an
unfair and therefore unfit person.. C. B.
! He bbard-solicits YOUR ballot for the position
of Superior Judge at the ap proaching election.
| We cannot longer remain SILENT since sen-
sational paper has re peatedly misrepreseuted
facts during the past few weeks. by stating
that opposition to Hebbard came fro m persons
who wan ted to loot The Peoples Home Savings
Bank, when the truth is that those who object
to him the unfortunate depositors who
suffered by the footing.
Briefly, the truth is as follows: In May, 1894
| depositors in the insolvent Peoples Home Saw.
lngs Bank organized and appointed a COM
mittee TO look after their interests Their first
| efforts were directed toward securing n salts
factory board OF directors. The existing board
had been prohibited from meeting for any
purpose whatever by Judge Hebbard. The
com mittee secured the promise of majority
of the board TO resign. Judge Hebbard agreed
that they might meet for the purpose OF re-
| signing. The next day the Judge had changed
his mind. Why? Because the men OF charac-
! Ter selected by the depoSitors fer the vacancies
were not satisfactory to Richards bosom
! friend. the notorious James Ava Watt who de-
| sired TO be the attorney and real manager of
| the bank. The appointment OF receiver fol-
lowed. Any ialr-minded man would suppose
widows and orphans were being dissi-
psted. an upright judge would appoint
corporation OF trust and responsibility,
after their interests. What did Hebbard do +?
He appointed as receiver an incompetent, ire
| sponsible political parasite, in the person of
| John +. Sheehan, so that his friend Watt be-
bank. This action of Hebbard was overruled
by the Supreme Court, when he immedia tely
| reappointed Sheehan on another similar ap-
plicalion.
During the seven months following Watt so
manipulated affairs as to secure ontrol of O.
N joIity of the banks stock, when Hebbard
graciousiy discharges the receiver and his
bondsmen without proper accounting to the
court. board OF directors selected by Watt
was then elected, and Sheehan and Watt con-
tinued in office as manager and attorney re-
spectiveiy, and u blanket resolution passed
by the board approving the acts of
the receiver. During the eight months
of the illegal receivership the sum OF S42-
995 Al was disbursed. Receiver Sheehan and
Attorney Watt each appropriated as his salary
the sum of $500 per month. In addition large
sums were squandered in fees and junketing
trips. No less an authority than the Attorney
General of the State has declared that the re-
ceiver not legally entitled to one cent OF
compensation for such services.
In view of these facts the several thousand
depositoIs In the Peoples Home Savings Bank
believe that Judge Hebbard more than any