The San Francisco call., 1904-11-17
BATTLING With
TECHNICALITIES
Election Commissioners OBJ
ject to Process Followed
in Regard to Accusation
ARGUMENT IN PROGRESS
RebstOck Files Motion to
Set Aside the Indictment
and Wyman Is Arraigned

There was an animated scene in
morning. The case of Charles Wyman,
Charged with fraudulently voting at
the primary election; Joseph Rebstock,
charged with violating the election law,
and the members of the Board of Elec-
tion Commissioners, accused of mis-
feasance in Office, were on the calendar.
Besides the defendants and their at
torneys Foreman Lilienfeld and the
members of the Grand Jury and Judge
Sloss were present as witnesses in the
Rebstock case on motion to set aside
the indictment. No definite conclusion
was reached in any of the cases except
the arraignment of WyInan, the others
having been continued.
WYMAN is ARRAIGNED.
The first case called was that of
Wyman for arraignment. Attorney
Edwards asked that the arraignment
go over till Saturday, as the testimony
in the Police Court was not yet trans
cribed. The Judge ordered that the
st,nographer of Police Judge Cabaniss'
court be notified to have the testimony
Transcribed at once, but insisted that
the arraignment be proceeded with.
The defendant was arraigned and the
Judge said that if any motion was de-
sired on behalf of the defendant it
could be made when the defendant was
asked to plead The case was continued
till Saturday on the suggestion of AS
sistant District Attorney Ferral.
I1
Election Commissioners was called
Attorney Hiram Johnson said that the
commissioners were busily engaged
every day canvassing the election re-
turns and asked for a continuance till
after the canvass was concluded. At
the proper time he had a motion to
make and he would submit his author
tiles to the District Attorney before
the next calling OF the case so that the
District Attorney would be prepared to
argue It.
Election Commissioner -Voorsanger
was asked by the Judge how long it
would take to canvass the returns and
he replied about two weeks.
Attorney Johnson thought that con-
tinuance till November rs would an
swer all requirements.
OBJECTS TO PROCESS.
At this stage Attorney T. v Gator.
who is associate counsel with, Johnson,
said he had an objection to make to
the process in regard to the accusa-
ton. He claimed that the defendants
were not in court legally and submitted
d motion objecting to any proceeding
by the court against the defendants or
to their being placed on trial upon the
accusation or to any judgment against
them because no legal or lawful pro-
cess had been issued in said proceed
ing or upon said accusation or been
served upon the defendants or either of
them.
. IF the parties are not in court law
fully" said the Judge, then you can
not make a motion for a continuance"
Addressing Gator the Judge said: II
will hear your motion at once"
Gator demurred, as he wished to
prepare himself with authorities, but
the Judge was insistent saying the de-
PENDANTS could not occupy double
position.
Gator then argued at considerable
length In support of his motion. He
contended that under section 20.
article VI OF the constitution, every
process civil or criminal, must be in
the name of the people. Therefore
the filing of an accusation by the
Grand Jury and a notice annexed to it
by the District Attorney that copies
had been served uDon the Commits
sicners was illegal. The accusation
should have been made in the name of
the people.
District Attorney Byington replied
that it was not criminal prosecution,