The San Francisco call., 1898-02-04

Chairman Colnon was missed all day from his favorite post behind Attorney Stratton, who seemed to be in a state of mind inclining him to advocate the suppression of newspapers.
 Shortly after the morning session had opened, with Slade on the witness stand. Attorney Stratton made a special objection which was in the nature of charge that counsel for the Paraffine Company were working" the newspapers. to put it vulgarly. He was sarcastically aggrieved that the press never came to the rescue of "a downtrodden public official" but were always rescuing the downtrodden peo- pie.
 T will reply on behalf of Mir. Sulli- van and myself" said Judge Cope, that we have never at any stage Of this case sought newspaper publicity. The case. as your Honor knows, pro- gressed here several days before the newspapers mentioned it at all. We have never sought to give information to anybody connected with the news papers. If the newspaper reporters de- sired information from us which we thought We could conscientousIy give we have given 1t, as we believe that the newspapers have the right to know and be informed upon questions in- NOlNlHS
 If this case has attracted the atten- tion of the newspapers it is not our fault; 1t is the fault of those gentlemen whose conduct has brought this inves- tigation. We are not responsible for 1t. if this has become a public ques- tion.
 We have a right to come into court to try this question or any other legal question upon which your Honor sees fit to receive evidence. If the newspa- pers take it up, if the newspapers add to the exposures that have been made in court, the gentlemen should reflect upon their past conduct and bemoan that. and their sad fate, that has brought upon them this notoriety We do not care about the notoriety, although we appreciate the fact that the service of the newspapers is val uable for public purposes.
 We expect il to have no influence i upon the court or upon the trial But 1 we say that We have a right to produce this evidence, not. because 1t may get ! into the newspapers or will get into the newspapers, but because 1t is com | petent evidence for your Honor to re- ! ceiye-
 The theory of this case is, as we [ have explained several times. that the Board of Harbor Commissioners have
 
 | travelling or posing under the name of 1 corporations, or under names that I would indicate corporate existence. but which turned out to be individuals and l partnerships; that they have unduly ! favored them for a considerable length l of time.
 l We now say that we desire to show | from the books of these institutions ! that their conduct has been open to 1 suspicion. The entries in their books are such that they are unable satisfac- torily to explain them. and the court | would have a right to infer from that i fact that the conduct of those corpora ! tions or those individuals and partner | ships Is a matter for suspicion.
 Of course the Beard Of State Harbor i Commissioners, the president of the ' board or any member of the board, may. if they can do it to the satisfac- i tion of the court, come upon the stand and purge themselves of any connec- | tion with this matter.
 They may be able to convince your Honor that their conduct has been per- ! fectly fair and open and free from sus- 1 picion, but if they do not do it. we i claim that this evidence Of suspicious transactions in the books of these fav-