The San Francisco call., 1907-06-12
Former Boss to
Tell Jurors of
Boodling Deal
Expected to Testify He
Gave Schmitz Cash
for Influence
Defense attempts to
Block the NeU MoDe

AS foretold exclusively In The Call
Abe Ruef has been called as witness
against his partner I'm crime. Mayor
nounced on Monday that it had COM
pleted its evidence there was general
disappointment over the fact that Ruef
had not been summoned When. there
fore. Call Abe Ruef" came suddenly
from the prosecution yesterday after
noon buzz of interest ran through
the court room. Although objections
from Attorney Campbell OF the defense
Kept Ruef from giving his testimony
yesterday there Is reason to believe
that the tracks will be cleared and
Ruef given the right of way today
Ruef Will be able to tell an inter-
esting story. The prosecution will use
no more of it than is necessary, and on
the other hand the defense will be
restricted in the cross examination of
the witness The coup of the prose-
cution has already had a powerful
effect upon the minds of the jurors as
ii has upon the auditors in the court
room. The desperate efforts Of the de-
tense TO block the answer to the ques-
tion: Did you not pay s250O in cur
rency to Mayor Schmitz?" has nat
urally tended to create an impression
When Ruef takes the stand today
arguments will be completed on the
admission of his testimony. and if
Judge Dunno rules in favor of the
prosecution the examination of the
witness will be begun. IL promises TO
be the most sensational day in court
Ruef viii testify. il allowed to pro-
ceed, that he received $4,000 from the
French restaurant proprietOrs and
gave Mayor Schmitz s2500- This. the
prosecution believes, will clinch the
case against the mayor.
s. The prosecution had prepared a trap
for the defense and was Inclined to
believe that the mayor and his entire
legal array had fallen into. When
Ruef was not put on the stand for d.
rect testimony by the prosecution the
mayor took hope and asked his attor-
neys to allow him to take the stand in
his own defense, believing that he
could shatter the case against him.
Not only did the mayor fail TO do this,
but he paved, the way for the intro
duction of Ruef's testimony in rebuff
tai. In putting Ruef on in rebuttal
instead of for direct evidence the pros
ecution has scored a distinct victory.
The field of cross examination will be
limited and Ruef will be used to bring
out only those points which could not
be established by any other witness.
moreover, IN taxing the SJdnd at tnlS
time Ruef will have before him the
testimony of the mayor and. naturally
resenting the attempt of Schmitz to
shift the entire blame for the transac-
tion, Ruef will lay bare the exact po-
sition Of Schmitz.
Ruef. 1t is said, regards Schmitz as
the arch sinner in the French restau-
rant transaction and it is not unlikely
that in his testimony he will state
that he was urged to action in the
matter by the mayor. Then, when he
had collected $4,000 from the restau-
rant men. he was called upon by
Schrnftz to divide
Another advantage gained by the
prosecution IN putting Ruef on at this
time lies in the fact that the testi-
mony the most damaging against the
mayor, will be fresh in the minds of
the jurors when they retire to delib-
crate.
II plans carry the case will go to
the jury tomorrow.