The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1899-03-13
O'BRIEN JURY
CALLED BEFORE
THE GRAND JURY
Could Not Agree Upon
a Verdict.
SENSATION IS LOOKED FOR
SEVERAL UGLY RUMoRs OF
JURY FIXING HEARD.
On the Previous Trial the Defendant
Was Convicted and Sentenced to
Ten Years Imprison-
ment.
SENSATION is LOOKED FOR
SEVERAL UGLY RUMoRS O1
JURY FIXING HEARD.
Oakland Office San Francisco Call

SUo broadway,
The jury that tried James F. O Brien OF
Livermore, charged with criminaily as
saulting Miss Ogilvie de B. Lopez, has
been cited to appear before the Grand
Jury for investigation next Tuesday
morning and sensational developments
are looked for.
The case went to the jury shortly after
noon yesterday, and at about 1890 o'clock
this morning, having failed TO arrive at
any agreement as to a verdict, Judge
Ellsworth discharged them. They stood
nine for acquittal and three for convic-
ton The jury was made up as follows:
P S. Amarel Henry Hauschildt, John
Seebeck, A. Q. Perry, p. Swords, c. E.
Bowman, Z. Consadine, II. Menges, w.
H. Lee, j. Madden, z. kerney and Hiram
Bailey.
Ugly rumors were afioat on the streets
and in the courthouse corridors as soon as
the jury had been selected In fact whis-
pers of fixing of prejudice" and ia
voritism" were heard frequently. Much
difficulty was experienced IN selecting the
jury. The regular panel had been eX-
hausted and a special Venire issued. Then
il was stated that friends of the defense
had scattered the right kind of people
along Broadway and near the courthouse,
so that the DEPUTY sheriff to whom was
assigned the duty OF subpenalng Jurors
could not help stumbling against
O Briens friends.
examined as to their qualifications that
the prosecution frequently asked whether
the Juror under examination was ae-
quainted with certain local wholesale
liquor dealer. The point involved was
that of an attempt to show partiality, in
asmuch as the defendants father is en-
gagged in the saloon business, as are also
several of the jurors. 1t was unoh1clally
charged that certain brick contractor
had talked" with some of the jurors,
and during the last few days of the trial
E11Oa Ellsworth 1nmOniShpd the Jury not
to discuss the case with any one, utter
ing the admonition in such Stentorlan
tones that it attracted no small attention.
That these rumOrs reached the ears of
the court and prosecution is indicated by
the fact that only a few days ago Judge
Ellsworth, Chief Deputy District Attor-
nev Melvin and NJ. &. Chapman of coun-
sci for the prosecution held a long confer
ence, during which "a suspected juror
was discussed. However, 1t was deemed lee ne
inadvisable to take any action until the
jury had been given an opportunity to
deliberate and determine OBrien's fate.
Much interest is manifested in the ultI-
mate outcome of the OBrien cause and
the result of the proposed investigation
by the Grand Jury. Although the de-
PENDANT and prosecuting witness are nom
residents, the courtroom was thronged
with the friends of either party until late
last night, awaiting a verdict from the
jury.
O'Brien was first tried last May and the
case proved one of the most sensa tional
ever tried in local courts. O'Brien on that
occasion was convicted ana sentenced 10
ten years Imprisonment, but his attor-
neys secured for him a new trial on err
rors. The second trial has been in prog
ress since February % last, and has
proved but little less sensational than the
first. And now O. Brien will be put on
trial once more.
At the opening of the case O'Brien's
father was reputed a wealthy man. To-
day it is said his property is encountered
on account of his endeaVors to save his
son from prison. The prosecution of
o Brien this time was conducted by Dep
uty District Attorney Phil Walsh and
associated with him were ex-Mayor NJ. c.
Chapman and Attorney Tom Scott of Su-
mol The defenses interests were looked
after by Attorney Frank MCGOWAN Of
San Francisco.