The San Francisco call., 1899-01-24

Colonel +. +. Preston was called as a
witness and sworn, and testified as fol-
lows:
The chairman-State your name to the
committee, please
Q. Where do you reside?
A. Woodside, San Mateo County.
Q. What is your business?
A. Attorney-at-law.
Q. Do you know Moses Gunst?
A. l do.
Q. Do you know Daniel M. Burns?
Q; Did you ever have a conversation
with Moses Gunst relative to the use of
money to promote the election of a Uni
ted States Senator?
A. Yes.
Q. State where and when that CONVEX
sation took place
A. AS nearly as I can remember. a dav
or two before the first of the year-pos-
| sibly ON Sunday, the first of the year. !
am not certain about that; 1 might be
off week or ten days-prior. But |
think it was very nearly the first of the
year, in his store on Kearny street in San
Francisco.
Q. Do you remember the substance of
that conversation?
A. Yes, sir.
Q. You may state it to the committee.
| EOh-first-who were present?
| "A. Nobody.
Q. You were there, and Mr.. Gunst?
A. Well, am nobody, and Mr.. Gunst
was there.
q. Now you may state the substance of
the conversation. -
A. Mr.. Gunst came from the rear of the
store to the front and spoke to me about
the attacks that The Call was making
upon him. l told him l had nothing
whatever to do with the management of
The Gail, and was not responsible for any
articles that appeared in it, Mr. Gunst
said that it would have to stop. 1T
must be stopped l told him that | had
nothing to do with it; that I was the
attorney for The Call, but was in no
h1
peared, never saw them and had nothing
to do with the policy of the paper, From
that it went to conversation on the
Senatorial situation and a discussion of
the availability of the candidates, and
Mr. Gunst said. in discussing Mr. Burns
availability. that he had spent $4,000 of
impression upon my mind at the time,
because it was in conflict with other
statements that had heard made on the
street, and left very peculiar condition
Of thought in my mind That is all
The chairman-You say he spent $4,000
in the fight. Was the nature of the fight
colonel: Was the fight spoken of the
fight for the election of United States
Senator?
A Yes; we We're talking about the
Senatorial fight.
Q. Had it any bearing at all on the
general ticket?
A. No, sir; not to my mind. The gen
eral ticket was not mentioned We were
discussing the Senatorship.
The chairman-Any questions further,
gentlemen?
Mr.. Burnett-Did he tell you how he
came by that knowledge?
y. No, sir.
Q. Did he speak of any particular place
in which Mr.. Burns had spent money?
Q. Did he mention the name o. any can
didate or any member of the Legislature?
A. No, sir. We were discussing the
availability of Mr.. Grant and of Mr..
Burns candidacy and Mr.. Burns claims
to be a Senator. | was opposing Mr..
relations with Mr.. Burns
9. What are they?
a. Very close relations. So close that
the California Jockey Club, with which
Mr.. Burns is connected, is in rooms in
the new building which Mr.. Gunst has
taken on Kearny street; and anybody who
knows politics in San Francisco knows
that Mr.. Burns and Mr.. Gunst are close
friends. | don't think either Mr.. Burns
or Mr.. Gunst disputes that. The CONVEX
sation, in my mind. was predicated on just
the same state of affairs as if | was talk
ing to Mr.. Burns myself, so far as the
relations between the men were con-
cerned-I can tell you that was talking
to very close, intimate friend of his. He
did not say who had the money that was
thing of that sort. He did not say the
state Central Committee; but he sim
ply said that he knew that Burns had
spent $4,000 of his money And We were
discussing the Senatorial fight.
@. Did you discuss that matter any
further? That is, the amount?
A. No, sir.