The San Francisco call., 1906-11-15
Chinatown Graft Next Task Of Grand Jury
Story of French
Restaurants Is
Told Again


in their greetings to the owners
Of the former French restaurants.
Howell could tell little, for his
term expired Immediately after
the notorious deal was arranged
by Ruef TO save the liquor Ii
censes Of the resorts. Hutton, as
the original crusader, could tell
the jury great DEAL but as he
was at that time persona non
grata with the administration
could give no evidence in any
way connecting Ruef or Mayor
Schmitz with the hold-up, having
never discussed the subject with
them.
Poheim was placed on the commits
sion by Ruef to succeed Howell. and
vas. Of course. a good friend of the
restaurant men Reagan and Drink
house were the star witnesses before
the jury. Reagen told OF how he was
encouraged by Mayor Schmitz to make
the crusade against the resorts and
kept ignorant Of any plan TO make the
restaurants come through with large
gum OF money. He related the meet
ing he had with the executive on a
Sunday afternoon, at which Ruef was
also present. and how they pleaded
and argued with him TO vote TO grant
the licenses 10 the restaurants after the
deal had been arranged and. Ruef had
received his fee.
one after another the restaurant
proprietors themselves were called and
81 degeloped that the fee il was agreed
TO pay Ruef was $4,000 and that he re-
ceived all but $500. Some OF them tes-
tffed IN favor Of Ruef notably Jean
Loupi. who said that he and his col
leagues Of their own accord appealed
to the boss TO take their case. which
was then pending before the Police
Commission.
HAD TO HAVE RUFF
Several Of the witnesses testified,
however. that they had first engaged
Attorney Martin Stevens TO represent
them. but il was found that he could
accomplish nothing. Then the word was
passed 10 them see Ruef" This they
did, and the result was that their busi-
nesses were saved.
But the jurors hesitated on the iden-
fity OF the man who had urged them
10 seek the administration boss. The
question was raised whether or not his
connection with Ruef could be definite
iy established. Heney had not taken
brought out so thoroughly before the
trial court was reached. But as the few
members Of the inquisitorial body 50
desired adjourRnent was taken TO this
morning that the necessary witnesses
might be resummoned.
The most important witness on this
phase OF the case is S. Constantine, who
owned Toronis He has heretofore
made the statement that during his diff
hculties with the union walters, ending
ultimately in the revocation Of his IL
cense. Ruef came 10 him In an effort to
intimidate him by a threat to revoke
his license. II is expected that Heney
viii fully establish today that Ruef ex-
erted himself to let the restaurant pro-
prietors understand that he held the
whiphand over them and would WELD
il IL they did not meet his money de-
mands.
THE LAW OF EXToRTIoN
The following is the law regarding
the crime OF extortion:
''51S-ENtortion: Extortion is the
obtaining OF property from another
with his consent induced by wrongful
use OF force. or fear or under cover OF
Official right.
''5Is-What may constitute extortion:
Fear, such as viii constitute extortion,
may be induced by a threat, either:
- To do an unlawful injury to the
threatened. or to any relative OF his. or
member OF his family; or,
- To accuse him, or any relative OF
his. or member OF his family. Of any
crime. or.
%. To expose. or impute TO him or
them any deformity or disgrace; or,
- To expose any secret affecting
him or them.
.520-Punishment for extortion in
certain cases: Every person who ex-
torts any money or other property from
another. under circumstances not
amounting 70 robbery. by means. OF
force. or any threat. such as is men
toned In the preceding section, is pun
ished by imprisonment in the State
Prison not exceeding i've years"
Ruef made the announcement last
night that he had discovered the con-
tract he had signed with the restaurant
keepers 10 act az their attorney over a
period OF two years. He said that ii
was signed by the president OF the Res
taursnt Mems Association and himself
and that IL proves conclusively that he
was regularly engaged as their attor-
ney and did not act in a single instance
for them 10 hold them up. Ruef ex-
plains that he had forgotten the exist
ence Of the contract until yesterday.