Arizona republican., 1907-08-30

San Francisco. Aug. 29.-The task of showing that the Pacific States Tele- phone company in 1905 sought to prevent entrance into oakland of the Home Telephone company, by organ izing a straw company. the Home Telephone company. obtaining for it a franchise. was resumed in continua- ton of the Glass bribery trial this morning. Attorne- William A. Beas- ley O: San Jose who testified yester- day to having allowed Agent Halsey of the Pacific States corporation to use his name as bidder for the fran chise. was recalled and testified that he bid in the franchise and furnished a suret,- bond of $250O to the Oakland council, then signed and delivered through Halse-- all of his stockhold- ings in the straw" company to F.. J. Trimmer. who at the time was auditor of the Pacific States company. Sub sequently the scheme was abandoned and Zimmer went to the Oakland council and caused the franchise to be forfeited and the bond released Beas- ley said the Pacific States company paid him Sl00 a month for the part he played in the straw deal He was supplied b. Halsey with money for the expenses he incurred. amounting to a trifle more than $11.0OO. His sal ary was never paid by check but all ways tn coin or currency.
 In overcoming a spirited fight put up by the prosecution, Delmas adduced testimony from Beasley which placed Pillsbury. general counsel for the Pa cific States Telephone company. in a bad light before the jury. Pillsbury had testified that the matter of dealing with the telephone opposition" had not come within his duties at all, but had been solely under the authority and direction of General Manager Glass. In direct proof to the contrary Beasley testified that the articles of incorporation and other documents vi- tai to the "straw" company's applica- tions in Oakland were prepared by the law department of the Pacific States company. over which Pillsbury presid- ed. His impression was that Halsey had told him they had been prepared by Pillsbury himself. President Henry '. Scott was called for another cross examination. Delmas desired to show by him and he succeeded after a wig orous objection by Heney. that the fact that Scott approved the monthly vouchers for Abe Ruers salary had been testified to by Scott as long ago as last March. when he was a witness before the grand jury. The bringing out by Delmas the fact that Scott had approved some of these vouchers that featured in yesterdays proceedings gave cause to an ugly row between counsel. Heney sought to prevent Del mas from wringing grand jury admis- sion from Scott today on the ground that Delmas' purpose was to lay the foundation for a false promise which would enable him to argue to the jury that the prosecution had deliberately sought to suppress the evidence.
 Thomas E. Sherwin. auditor of the Pacific States company was recalled by Delmas for a similar purpose. Af- ter the same sort of a fight he was permitted to testify that he produced the Ruef salary vouchers before the grand jury. Heney expedited the tes- timony by finally withdrawing his ob- jectiOn to it. The indication at the time of the noon adjournment was that the defense would go to the jury without offering any evidence as was done in the former trial of Glass. Glass coun- sel however. said they had not finally determined their point