Los Angeles herald., 1907-10-10
WITNESS DECLARES
DANFORD TO BLAME
SAYS ATTORNEY TOLD HIM TO
TESTIFY FALSELY
Promised Immunity to Tell What He
Knows About Charge Of suborna-
tion Of Perjury-Witness
Startled

| The case of William ]. Danford.
charged with subornation of perjury.
was called In Justice Summerfield's
court yesterday afternoon. The per-
Jury is alleged to have been committed
In the case of E. r. Cline VS.. H. l..
Drake over bill Of sale made by the
plaintiff to the defendant conveying a
store and also certain debts. The ques-
tipn of the debts caused the trouble.
Under promise of immunity Harley
l. Drake admitted yesterday on the
witness stand that he had perjured
himself in the matter of the bill Of sale
in his testimony given before the
superior court during his trial follow
ing the suit of June 13, 1907. He laid
the blame for the perjury on his attor-
ney, William ]. Danford, claiming he
acted under instructions from the
latter.
In the original bill of sale from Cline
to Drake an item of $1100 indebtedness
was included in the transfer, but some
how the item was left out of a carbon
copy that was made at the same time
Drake did not produce the original in
the trial, claiming 1t had been stolen.
His shop had been robbed of some
papers and this furnished a foundation
for the story of the missing paper.
The original bill of sale was produced
yesterday by the attorney for the
prosecution and Drake admitted 1t had
not been stolen. He claims that in tes-
tifying falsely he was acting under the
advice of Attorney Danford.
did you know your testimony was
false?" asked the court of the witness
during yesterdays hearing.
II did," was the reply.
why did you do it?"
Mr.. Danford told me could"
With this statement of the witness
declaring his own guilt the case was
opened yesterday morning. District
Attorney John c.. North repres enting
the prosecution and Attorneys LIE
lCompte Davis and Jud Rush of the firm
pf Davis, Rush and Willis stood for
the defense. The attorneys clashed
continually during the examination of
The witness, objections being made to
Questions asked and sarcastic filings
assing during the disputes.
Early in the trial 1t developed into
q immunity bath proposition The
vtness was considerably startled when
y judge turned to him significantly
al asked do you understand that this
pimised immunity is to extend beyond
tn term of Mr.. North?' The witness
grsped the significance of the remark.
bu said he understood the immunity
weld hold good for all time.
hen Attorney North had finished
his examination of the witness LIE
Conpe Davis commenced a series of
quetilns for the defense. He brought
out th history Of the young man from
the tne he was a boy. being frequently
interHted by objections from Attor-
ney Noth. He attempted to show that
the Eitess would tell whatever he
lthoushH Hwould be to his advantage
rather TN conf1ne himself to the truth
and fTKg fell prey to the shrewd ques-
tiohg of the attorney.
Anumerous times during the exam
inatn the court would step in with a
few emarks which served materially
to car up the premises and advance
the fal
IT you thought your testimony
wouI send you to the penitentiary
woul you tell the TRUTH" asked the
judge
II puld be foolish If did not tes-
tify what would clear me-" replied
the wness.
/ Attdey Danford said last night
after Y trial: "TheN witness seems to
be unstled in his testimony as to the
4 bill ofale Once he told me 1T was
misplaq, once he said it was lost and
again hsaid 1T had been stolen"