The San Francisco call., 1905-01-31
LAWYER ACH AYERS
RAID Is tAWLESS
Says Grand Jurors
Must Not Pose
as RefOrmers.

The defense of 62o Jackson street,
battling to defeat by legal means the
police efforts to suppress the notorious
resorts, resolved itself yesterday into
the eloQuence of Henry Ach, attorney.
Judge Hebbard heard him, morning
and afternoon, not without pertinent
and caustic interruption by the court
and the District Attorney, and at the
end of the oratory the hearing was
continued until tomorrow. This was
because Ach has another engagement
to-day to appear as friend of the court
in Judge Cooks hearing of the con-
tempt proceedings against the editor
and proprietor of the Bulletin.
If Ach's argument, bolstered by three
score and ten authorities ranging from
United States Supreme Court opinions
down to the theories of obscure law
writers, is sustained by the court then
the District Attorney, the Grand Jury
and the Chief of Police have been ex-
ceeding their authority in raiding i'm
moral places without process of law"
and there will be some damage suits
forthcoming. Ach's arguments and au-
thorities were also the pegs upon which
Attorney Nagle, present in court, hung
his hopes of defeating like PROPOSE
ton to give the police exclusive juris-
diction in Belden place.
While, by order of the Judge, law
point only was at issue, Ach allowed
his ready tongue to tattle personalities
about District Attorney Byington and
Grand Jurors Andrews and BoweS, who
followed his talk with apparent in
terest.
why they are merely citizens in
the capacity they have attempted to
exercise in this matter said the law
yer, "and they are subject to suit for
damages"
PROMISES DAMAGE SUIT.
why don't you sue" retorted By
ington. with a tone Of challenge.
"Oh, you'll be sued all right, with
delightful sufficiency, and every men,
Der of the Grand Jury will be a party
defendant" responded Ach.
When the proceedings began in the
morning, Ach offered a score or more
| of affldavits in behalf of his client, Sc
! bastian Ravani, keeper of the cigar
store at the entrance to $40 Jackson
| street. One was the affidavit Of the
restaurant keeper in the building, who
said that his trade had dropped off $40
a day since the beginning of police ac-
tivity in the neighborhood and that he
never asked his customers whether
| they were typewriters or dishwashers
/ or followed some other profession" All
| the affiants had something to say about
the acts of the police in intimidating
customers since the granting of the
| preliminary injunction.
/ Judge Hebbard declined to admit the
affidavits and announced that he would
close the evidence upon the motion to
dissolve the injunction on the affidavits
| originally submitted. This shut out the
| oral evidence which Attorney Max
| Kuhl said he would demand in behalf
of the Police Department.
| Il will further announce" said the
court, that from carefuI considera-
ton of the affidavits I must find that
| the premises about the cigar store are
| used for purposes of prostitution This
! leaves the primary and ultimate issue
| of the case dependent upon the law as
| to the authority of the police, Grand
Jury, or any officer or citizen to go
upon the premises without the consent
of those who occupy them, peacea bly
or using force of arms and breaking
open doors and so entering and making
arrests without authority of law. 1t is
/ one thing to moraliZe upon these oues-
tions; it is one thing to criticize courts
and Judges; it is another thing for the
courts and Judges to apply the law.
This is what this court will do
RAIDS AND EXTORTION.
His limitations thus ordered, Ach be-
gan. At first he read in full a New
York opinion on a like case which re-
! fected upon reformers and discussed at
length so called raids as an efficient
means to effect extortion by the no.
lice" When he had done Judge Heb
bard expressed the wish that he should
read no more of his authorities In full
| merely cite them. In the course of his
multifarious citations Ach did well bv
the courts instructions, barring his
own digressions upon the conclusions
to be drawn.
When he reached a discussion of the
statutory provision that a policeman n
has no right to arrest without warra ant
unless the offense is committed in his
presence, Mr.. Byington interrupted
! him. Said the District Attorney. Are
you willing to take an injunction pre-
/ venting the police from interfering with
the cigar store, but permitting them to
pass through and behind it into the
building"
Scornfully Ravani's attorney meas
ured the public's lawyer with his gaze
II am not bargaining with trespassers
and lawbrealxers: I am seeking to pro-
tect the plaintiffs in this case. The
| Police Department commits these nm
lawful acts and then asks counsel ~
agree that it shall do the very things
complained of. This mans business Is
almost ruined by the policemen. who
stand in front of his place and intimi-
date his customers by their mere pres
ence."
i Byington asked If Ach could honest
ly say that the police had threatened
Ravani's cigar store. and Ach replied
that the matter was set out in twenty
three affidavits, and If Byington did not
believe them he could have the affiants
indicted for perjury. 'I would have
them indicted If they testified to those
;, things upon the stand said the Dis
trict Attorney, whereupon Ach vouched
for the truth of all the affidavits. say