The San Francisco call., 1907-03-12


when Justice was being apporuoneo.
Campbell asked for an immediate trial
and expressed a willingness 10 proceed
with the prosecution OF the official so
soon as the matter Of his boss was
out Of the way. IT was arranged that
Schmitz should appear today and IL
l1y any chance the Ruef matter was de-
layed the Mayor would come before
the bar Of Justice.
Ienev opened the Ruef proceedings
with the motion that the action OF
Judge Hebbard in passing on an appi-
cation for a writ OF habeas corpus pe
set aside. thus invalidating the writ
OF error which was issued on the show
ing Of the denial OF the earlier writ
neney argued that Hebbard had no
jurisdiction under the law and the
rule OF procedure OF the Superior
Court which established that cases
should be assigned 10 departments by
the presiding Judge and should not be
removed.
position to apply to Hebbard for
writ of habeas corpus, as he was but
nominally in custody. Henry Ach re-
piled with a defense Of the rights OF
habeas corpus.
DUNE SAYS "TRICKERY,
He persisted that Hebbard had as
much right as any Judge to><issue
writ of habeas corpus or writ OF
error.
But these proceedings were secured
through trickery and deceit" cried
Judge Dunno hOtly.
Heney argued that Hebbard had
passed on the right Of habeas corpus
as a court and not as Judge and
could not undo the acts OF a concurrent
court. to which Ach replied that the
proceedings on the writ Of habeas cor
pus were separate from those pending
before Dunno and not amenable 10 any
ruling Dunno might now make.
Dunno sharply rebuked Ach for his
spirit of argument, cOndemning Judges
who act from ulteriCr motives. Ach
covered up under the declaration that
he was simply securing all possible
legal rights for his poor client. Each
Judge, he claimed, had a supreme right
40 issue habeas corpus writ which
would be final.
Heney drew a conclusion from this
FOR Achs benefit. showing how. under
Ach's reasoning, a writ Of habeas cor
pus might have been granted Siemsen
the gaspipe murderer.
At the conclusion of the arguments,
which were heated and caustic on both
sides Judge Dunno stated that since
the entire matter was on hearing be
fore the State Supreme Court and il
Was understood that that bench would
probably issue its opinion soon, he
would withhold action on Heney's mo-
ton
Then Ruef fled his affidavit OF preju-
dice. backed by one OF similar context
sworn TO by Paul y. Nippert Of the
Aetna Indemnity Company, his bonding
concern. Ruef claimed that Dunno was
biased through friendship for John s
Partridge. late candidate for Mayor,
end Nippert artested that at Bunneele.
TrrHe Hern
Dunno had discussed the local graft
and corruption and had denounced Ruef
and Schmitz in no uncertain terms. The
Ruef affidavit was lengthy and de-
scribed particular incidents alleged to
show prejudice on the courts part.
Chief OF Police Dinan was present
with his attorney. Lewis +. ByingtOn.
The case in which Dinan is jointly
charged with Ruef with conspiracy was
set for March IS for the filing Of de-
naurrers and the charge OF perjury
against the Chief was set for March %.
The boss. his fate still undecided,
was remanded to the custody Of the
.olisor until today at 10 o'clock.
But Ruers hope could yet live
there were two other courts to hear
from.
But before Ruef could have his lunch
eon. in custody at the time he learned
that the Supreme Court Of the State
had denied an order prohibiting Dunno
from trying the case, following the
ruling OF the State District Court Of
Appeal
SUPREME COURTS OPINION
The decision OF the Supreme Court
is that the writ Of error does not stay
proceedings. The complete opinion, by
tne entire court, is AS follows,
The petitioner. who was under in
dictment and awaiting trial in the SU-
berior Court. applied 10 another depart
ment Of the court for writ OF habeas
corpus. which was granted. Upon a
hearing he was remanded 10 custody
and thereupon applied for and obtained
from the Judge of the court issuing the
writ Of habeas corpus writ Of error
10 the supreme Court Of the United
States. Il being claimed that the
her Of remand was in cOntravention
~ the petitioners rights under the
constitution Of the United States. The
proceed inRs necessary TO perfect the
Issuance and service of the writ OF
error and the citation hereunder were
taken.
~The petitioner now applies for
writ of prohibition TO restrain the
rourt in which the indictment is pend
Ing from proceeding with the trial.
I'VE are satisfied that the writ OF
nrror. if il is properly issued. does not
operate TO stay proceedings in the court
having Jurisdiction Of the indictment.
''The writ IS denied"
But there was still left the United
States District Court and Judge de 3a-
Ten. who al 2 o'clock was to pass on
the application Of Ruef for an order
10 show cause why writ OF habeas
corpus should not issue to him TO take
him from the custody Of Elisor Biggy
and place him where he stood in fact
II not IN law, when Judge Hebbard
issued the writ Of error.
GANG WAS THERE
AT p. M. Ruef and all his lawyers,
accompanied by a few Of the gang. led
by the companion in flight. MYRTLE
Cert. were in the courtroom in the
3ostOfiice building Frank j. Murphy
ind Henry Ach spoke for Ruef and his
petition: Francis J. Heney opposed the
Application.
Heney read an affidavit denying the
allegations OF Ruef's document; deny
ing that the boss was held without due
process OF law or was deprived OF his
rights. He recited the empanelment
~ Grand Juror Wallace G. Wise by
Judge Cfaham and reiterated his argu-
hent OF the morning that Ruef was in
custody but nominally and not in such