The San Francisco call., 1908-03-21

be accepted as true unless shown to be
false.
Murphy's list divided the indictments
against Ruef into FIVE general groups
In the first three groups of those emu
merated duplicates existed. The groups
We're:
Eighteen indictments for bribing subervi-
sors In the fight trust matter. ball :, oo 900
Nine duplicate indictments. bail $1,000 ;. ooe
Seventeen indictments for bribing super
visors for United Railroads trolley ,-o ooo
Fourteen dunlicates hati ... 14o, 600
Seventeen indictments for brIbing super 80
Fourteen dunlicatas hall ..... 140, 600
Thirteen indictments for bribing super 90 ooo
yisors in Home telephone case. bail bail, iSV'ooo
Fourteen indictments for bribing super 90 aoo
ytsors in Parkside deal, bail iop'ooo
FACES % YEARS IN CELL
Murphy said that conviction on any
two of those counts would mean. with
maximum penalty. the equivaient Q.
life sentence or 2S years. He held tnat
in robbery cases where convlctioh
meant life Imprisonment the ball oIten
was fixed at $4,000.
THE court in fixing bail for any oe-
fendant," said Justice Cooper, takes
into consideration the circumstances OF
the defendant. the nature OF the crime
charged. the ability of the deIenuaht
to give bail. the question OF wnetner
the defendant had ever been lusltive
from justice and all surrounding GIT
cumstances."
Murphy easily computed that IL
would take 116 years to try hueI on
all the charges pending and that IN
those circumstances he might De con-
demned to life imprisonment without
trial.
Heney argued that the object or the
law was to assure certainty OF puR
shment, and that the constitutional
provisions derived from the Dill OF
rights. which guarantees that no de-
fendant shall be subjected TO excess
sive bail, was merely TO insure hperty
to persons held on fimsy charges.
Cooper agreed with the latter part
of .Heney's argument that in fixing bail
the presumption of the court Is that
the man is guilty.
Heney continued that when the GER
tainty of punishment was great as IN
the present case, the bail should De
heavy.
RICH GRAFTERs KIDNAPERs
I'VE are prepared to show" he de-
clared, that the conviction of the de-
fendant rests largely on the testimony
of James l.. Gallagher, and that Ell
forts have been made to get Gallagher
out of the way, to kidnap him. and tnat
these efforts have been made by the
rich accomplices of this defendant,
among whom are officials of the United
Railroads, just as they made an effort
to kidnap Lonergan. For those rea-
sons the bail at present fixed is not too
low"
"The court will endeavor to fix the
bail so as to prevent the defendant
fleeing" said Cooper. The fact is,
however that the defendant would
only be prosecuted on sufficient cases
that If convictions are obtained he
will get sentence equivalent to life
imprisonment"
IF you do not secure a conviction
after four or FIVE trials you doubtless
Will not proceed further?' asked JUS
tice Hall
I'VE will not stop until we have tried
lie cases unless we go out of office or
secure convictions on four or five," re-
sponded Heney with vehemence
In reply to question by Hall. Heney
said that the largest individual bail of
which he knew was $500, 600. This
man is not entitled to be out. The fact
that Ruef is worth money increases the
probability of his disappearing" he de-
clared.
Even IL he should disappear" said
Cooper, "he is still entitled to bail that
is not excessive"
BAIL NOT EXCESSIVE
NO excessive bail is required at the
present time" replied Heney.
During the afternoon affidavits were
filed by Ruef and by Ach and Murphy
Jointly. in opposition of Heneys affi-
davit of the morning session. Ruef' s
document took up the points of Heney's
and stated that when he went to
the Trocadero he was not a fugitive,
but was acting on the advice of his at
torneys, particularly of Attorney
Samuel Shortridge, and that he did not
leave until after Judge Hebbard had
granted him writ of error returnable
before the United States district court
and had set his ball at $500 Ruef
declares also that Clerk Beasley of the
United States courts advised him that
he might absent himself from the
courts. Ruef says that he did not leave
the city and that he just wanted a
rest.
In the Ach- Murphy paper Ruef is
sustained in all his contentious.