The San Francisco call., 1907-06-04
Continued from Page l, Column

afternoon adjournment and Immediately
preceding the exercise of the last per-
emptory challenge.
Fairall declared that the court erred
Friday when it granted to the prosecu-
ton the right to question and subse-
quently challenge Jurors who had been
once passed without the exercise of
the peremptory right of removal.
Owing to the action of the court in
excusng two jurors who had been
sworn to try the cause after the trial
had begun" said Fairall, "and against
the objection of the defense and in op
position to the defendants right, we
claim the right to exercise 10 addi-
tional peremptory challenges. and es-
pecially the right to challenge those
who were in the jury box at the time
of the exercise of the challenges by
the prosecution referred to-
Special Prosecutor Hiram w. john
son met Fairalls motion. The right
accorded Mr.. Heney on Friday" said
he. was within the code and was pro-
vided for by law
DUNNE OyERRULEs MOTION
Judge Dunno overruled the motion of
the defense. which, IL granted would
have delayed the case several weeks
longer
>FairalPs motion referred to the chal-
lenges made by Heney against William
u
A change of heart was exhibited in
the bearing of ]. j. Barrett of Schmitz'
counsel yesterday. Last week Barrett
was flint and steel, seemingly with the
sole purpose of drawing fire from the
not asbestos Heney. Yesterday Barrett
showed the effects of soothing syrup,
probably administered by J. c. Camp
bell, the senior counsel for the defense,
who has not concealed, even in the
courtroom, his disapproval of some of
the belligerent tactics of his associate.
AS a reward for being good Barrett
won an important ruling from Judge
Dunno late in the day when a last per-
emptory challenge was saved for the
Schmitz people by the court excusing a
prospective Juror, Richard c. Butler of
1873 Waller street, who had no opinion
concerning Schmitz's guilt or inno-
cence in the French restaurant cases,
but had his doubts on the mayors IN
tegrity in other lines of conduct. Dur
ing an examination of Thomas Elrick,
one of the accepted jurors, Heney had
tersely described one of Barretts con-
tentions as rot" and the once hot
spirited lawyer almost turned his other
cheek and replied in hurt tone: You
didn't call that point rot the other day
when you advanced it."
When Elrick was under examination
Barrett asked him if he had worked
against Schmitz or solicited votes in
his behalf Heney declared that such
questions were inadmissible and the
| former hotspur only retorted petu-
| lantly You can't lecture me, Mr..
Heney"
SEVEN vENIREMEN ON STAND
A genuine Monday lethargy hung
over the courtroom during the morning
and the progress of the trial was as
| quiet as was the gray day without.
Seven veniremen were examined
Edward j. Callan of 262 Sixth avenue,
Martin O'Connell of 2570 Market
street, retired foundryman and struc-
tural iron manufacturer, were not on
the assessment roll and were excused
J. B. Davitt of 314 Page street. who
| is president of the California baking
company, and is interested in other
bread making enterprises. had an opln
ion which he said would be hard to SET
aside.
Howard Black, 1927 Haight street,
the former supervisor, swore that he
! was not on the assessment roll, and
both were excused from service.
Theodore Dellwig, q retired baker
| living at 270 Ninth avenue, was the
! only man accepted in the morning. He
said that he retired three years ago
after so years in business in Polk
street One son had followed him in
the baking business, nnotner was ali
electrician in the employ of the tele-
phone company, third a lumber sales
man and a fourth a plumbers helper.
Dellwig had formed IN OPINION which
| he said would not influence him in the
jury box and he had no bias against
| the prosecution. In these respects he
was satisfactory to the prosecution
but Frank Drew, who was conducting
| the examination of talesmen for
| Schmitz, did not relish the idea of DELI
wig having an opinion. He secured
from the bread maker the declaration
] that he was a man of strong opinion
but could not coax him., no matter how
| hard he tried, to admit that the opinion
he then held would influence him in de-
| termining the case. After much uues
| tioning Drew allowed Dellwig to be
| passed and he was later sworn in as a
| Juror.
Charles w. Heyer. S23 Schrader street.
q teller in the German bank, had SOM
slight acquaintance in graft prosecu-
ton circles. He knew Frank Schmitz.
| brother of the defendant, and be-
| longed to fraternal organization of
which Ruef was a member Heyer told
Heney that he had 4n opinion in the
case which he could not set aside and
was excused without further parley.
Theodore Planz, tailor of 3340
Twenty second street, with branc.,
shop at 571 Lyon street, passed his ex-
/ animation easily. but was subjected to
one of the two precious challenges
which the defense held. Planz knew
George Duffey, president of the board
public works, in fact, Duffey was
client of the renovatory department OF
the tailor's establishment. Planz said
he had never discussed graft with
Duffey.
Under Drew's interrogations Planz
admitted that he had discussed graft
with other persons, and during those
symposiums had hazarded the opinion
that there must be something behind
it,
This frightened the defense and it
showed an apprehension which Planz