The San Francisco call., 1907-03-05

our ideas, comport with the dignity of
justice. the dignity Of this court or
our own dignity"
or interference with the carrying out
Of the schedule, the remainder OF the
programme was quickly carried out
Judge Hebbard telephoned for Attor-
ney General Webb. but the latter was
out of the city and no deputy in his
Office was willing to take the response
bility of appearing in his stead. Three
witnesses, one of them Ruef himself,
were all that were considered neces-
sary by Judge Hebbard to establish the
facts concerning Wise. Ach talked for
FIVE minutes on the questions brought
up in the petition for the writ and the
court was ready with decision.
PROCEEDS WITH PROGRAMME
At the outset Judge Hebbard ex-
pressed his sorrow over the fact that
the representatives of the people had
seen fit to leave his department cav
alierly, as he expressed Ii, and his re-
gret that an unwarranted imputation
had thus been cast upon the court.
There is. however. nothing else 1
can do.' he concluded. THE deputy Of
the Attorney General, to whom I ap-
pealed. does not feel that he can act.
and I must assume the responsibility.
4
new one. 1t has been raised many
times. but never finally passed upon on
the ground of constitutionality. The
fact is that Wallace Wise acted as
grand juror in 1905 on the Grand Jury
which returned this indictment against
the petitioner. and that he acted con-
trary to section 199 of the Code of
Civil Procedure.
TT so happens that, because OF the
ignorance or neglect of the Legislature.
section 995 of the Penal Code does not
contain as grounds of challenge sew
eral of the grounds mentioned in sec
ton 199 of the Code of Civil Procedure
as serving to disqualify a jurorA and
those mentioned are made exclusive.
Why~it should be that one act of the
Legislature describing those compe-
tent and incompetent should not be
embodied in the grounds for challenge
1 do not understand. The fault is pal
pable; the elimination is plain. One
says the grand juror is incompetent,
yet the other does not give grounds on
which he may be challenged"
BY the time he had reached his con-
cluding statement Judge Hebbard had
become so enmeshed in the tangie of
attempted legal elucidation that he
neglected to preserve his caution, for
got that his part was supposed to have
begun only when the petition for the
writ was formally filed in his court,
and admitted in so many words that
he had been taken into the confidence
of Ruefs counsel before the coup was
sprung and that he was fully eonver-
SAINT with what was expected of him.
Il am free to say that ! saw these
papers before they were fled" he vol
unteered. Il understand that what is
really desired is that the petitioner
may take this matter to the court of
last resort, and 1 only pass upon it
to enable him to reach that court.
which is the right of every citizen.
remand the petitioner to custody and
grant him a writ of error to the Su-
is fixed at 100000"
DUNNE's DECISION
The bail bonds were at hand. being
furnished by the same company which
had technically repudiated Ruef few
hours previously, and the custody was
quickly at an end. A citation was
secured from the Federal Court, set
ting May 2 as the date for the ap-
pearance on the writ of error before
the United States Supreme Court in
Washington.
Judge Dunno will not accept the cita-
tion for writ of error to the United
States Supreme Court, issued by Judge
Hebbard yesterday, as positive prohf-
bition to continuing Ruefs trial, with
out hearing the objections of the prose-
cution when the case is called this
morning, and there is still possibility
that the case may go to trial This was
made plain by Judge Dunne's statement
yesterday afternoon.
"All that 1 know of what has trans
pired today Is merely hearsay," he de-
clared. but sd far as I am able to say
now the trial will go on tomorrow
morning. 1 do not mean that I will
proceed in violation of a valid court
order or in opposition to the defend
ants rights. however. 1 simply mean
that so far as know now the trial will
proceed
Beyond this Judge Dunno refused to
make any statements concerning the
events of the day in Judge Hebbard's
court, to give an opinion as to the le-
gality of the writ OF error. or to say
what effect 1t would have on his future
action in connection with the graft
cases.
CRAFT CASES GO OVER
Continuances Are Granted TO schmitz,