The record-union., 1897-05-13
DURRAN1'S PETITION FILED.
The Grounds on Which Executive
ClemenCy is Asked.
Attorneys Deuprey and Dickinson
Claim Durrant Was I'm
justly Convicted.

Eugene n. Deuprey and General John
Il. Dickinson, attorneys for w. H. I.
Durrant, convicted of the murder OF
Blanche Lamont in the Emmanuel
Baptist Church in San Francisco on
April 3, 1895, will make a final appeal
for their clients life before Governor
Budd at II o'clock tomorrow morn
ing.
The application on file in the Gov
ernor's office requests the pardon, or
falling in that, the Communication of the
death sentence, by the Chief Executive.
Besides the application there are also
On file letters from A. E. Lucas, man
ager of a San Francisco detective
agency, and DR.. L. L. Moore of Lee
moore, both of whom request the Gov
ernor to commute the sentence to life
Stripped of legal verbiage the petition
for pardon or Communication of sentence
is as follows:
''To His Excellency, James H. Budd,
Governor: Your petitioner sets forth
respectfully that on the 22d day of
May, 1895, he was accused by the Dis
trict Attorney for the city and county
of San Francisco, by information, of
the crime of murder alleged to have
Sd day of April, 1895, in the said city
and county of San Francisco, by fell
oniously and with malice aforethought
killing one Blanche Lamont.
THAT on the 10Th day of May, 1895,
your petitioner was arraigned in the
Superior Court upon the information,
to which he pleaded not guilty
THAT thereafter on the Sth day of
July, 1895, an order was made by the
Superior Court for said city and coun-
ty, requiring $50 trial jurors to be
drawn and on the 22d day of July,
1895, the Sheriff certified to having
summoned the jurors named in the cer-
tificate.
THAT on the 22d day of July, 1895,
counsel for your petitioner interpOsed
motion for a change of venue sup
ported by affidavits.
THAT on the 25th day of July, 1895
reply affidavits We're filed and upon
submission of the motion it was denied
by the court.
That thereupon the defendants
counsel interposed an objection and
challenge to the panel Of jurors drawn
by the Superior Judges for the year
1895, as to the manner in which they
were drawn and summoned; that the
challenge to the panel being submit
ted and taken under consideration, the
court disallowed the same
THAT thereupon the court proceeded
over the objections on behalf of your
petitioner, by his counsel, to impanel
a jury to try the information and
charge against your petitioner.
THAT thereafter an alleged trial was
entered upon and pursued to and in
Guiding the 1st day of November, 1895,
at which time the jury so had and OBJ
tanned upon the so-called trial being
charged by the court, retired, and in a
few minutes, without any time to
deliberate upon evidence presented be-
fore them from the 4th day of Sep
TENDER, 1895 to October % 1895, re-
turned a verdict of guilty against your
petitioner.
That on the 22d day of November,
1895 the motion for new trial was filed
on behalf of your petitioner, and after
submission of said motion the court.
on the Sd day of December. 1895, de-
MED the motion for a new trial.
That thereupon on the 9th day of
December, 1895, the court pronounced
an alleged judgment and sentence, di-
recting the Sheriff of San Francisco
to deliver your petitioner to the War
den of the State Prison at San QUEEN
tin within ten days and your petitioner
to be kept and detained in close con-
finement until such time as should be
decided and fixed in the warrant Of
execution.
That an appeal was taken from said
judgment and sentence on the 9th day
of December, 1895.
That on the Sd day of March, 1897,
the Supreme Court of California affirm
ed the alleged judgment and order of
the Superior Court.
That on the Sd day of April. 1897,
after the delivery of an order denying
an application for rehearing, the Su-
preme Court forwarded to the Superior
Court, the remittitur.
That on the 10th day of April, 1897,
your petitioner was brought before the
Superior Court, Judge Bahrs presiding
and then and there another alleged
judgment, decree and sentence was
passed by Judge Bahrs. whereby he
sentenced your petitioner to death. and
also imposed upon him an imprison-