The San Francisco call., 1908-11-11
STEVENS SHIELDS
RUEF'S JURY F|XER
Refuses to Repeat COnversa-
tiOns Between Himself and
Blake
Admissions on Witness Stand
Leave No Doubt of Connection
With Attempted Bribery

nxer. is the man Martin Stevens seeks
10 shield by his refusal TO answer ques-
tions in the grand jury room. Stevens
admitted this in Judge Sturtevant
court yesterday when the district at
torney sought an order directing stew
ems 70 supply the information the grand
inv desired. Murphy had retained him
as attorney. Stevens said. and he based
his refusal 10 repeat the conversations
between himself and E. A. :. Blake, the
convicted Jury briber. solely upon the
ground that to do so would effect the
revelation of privileged communications
made him by Murphy. Judge Sturte-
want viii hear argument at noon today
upon the legal point involved. A Z.
Black. assistant United States district
attorney. is representing Stevens.
A transcript OF the proceedings be-
fore the grand jury the day before was
read during the hearing. This tran
script. together with answers made by
stevens while on the witness stand yes
terday. establishes beyond any doubt
the truth of Bla1es statement that
Murphy offered him $4,000, from Ruef,
If he would keep silence and undergo
punishment The most important of
the questions Stevens would not answer
in the grand jury room were as follows
on Monday October -. have a conver-
sation with Z. A. s. Blake. in which you
stated IN substance and effect, that Mr..
Frank Murphy had called upon you that
same morning and had placed in your
hands. 10 hold for Blake the sum of
$4,000. which Murphy Informed you
was not 10 be paid 10 Blake until after
Blake was sentenced. and did you not,
IN that same conversation, say. in sub
20 Ia
$4,000 was in note or notes due two
wears after date. and did you not assure
Blake that the security was absolutely
safe and ample, and did you not say to
him that he must trust to your judg-
ment as a friend and attorney"
When the question was repeated TO
him in court yesterday Stevens again
declined 10 answer, unless directed to
do so by the Judge. on the ground that
il involved the matter of professional
privilege between himself and Murphy.
Then Black. Stevens own attorney.
asked him: DO you intend to convey
that both Murphy and Blake had con-
suited you in reference to the same
matter?"
Yes. sir" was the answer, directly
connecting Murphy with the $4,000
episode, ana corroboratng Blake's con-
fession.
And that the disclosure Of communi-
cations from one would necessarily be
a disclosure OF communications from
the other concerning the same matter?''
Black asked.
Yes. sir" was the answer again.
Stevens made no attempt to conceal the
fact that IL was concerning the offer
Of SO 600 TO Blake to close his mouth
that Murphy consulted him.
BLAKE's LETTER TO STEVENS
Blakes letter to stevens, read into
the record yesterday, authorized and
requested the latter to consider all
conversations held between you and me
concerning the attempt by me and 9TH
ers TO 6orrupIly influence John Mar
Tin Kelly. q. juror drawn and summoned
in department Il of the superior court,
as not privileged" relieved him of the
obligation Of secrecy, and requested him
70 make a full and fair disclosure of
the same TO the grand jury Stevens
observed that he considered the letter
inartistically drawn. and his attorney
Black, raised the point that the letter
was not wide enough TO include the
conversations at the county Jail Blake
was in the courtroom and Langdon Of
fered TO put him on the witness stand
and have him give Stevens the widest
latitude. The judge, however, pre-
ferred that the release should be put
in writing.
The transcript of the grand jury pro-
ceedings showed that Martin Stevens
did not take the position that his an
swers would incriminate himself In
deed, he waxed very indignant when
Langdon asked him a question on that
point, although he said nothing when
the district attorney Instructed him
that the inquiry involved the attempt
nrnan11 . nd t,.&
mony might be used against him.
Assistant District Attorney William
Hoh Cook, after the transcript had
been read, questioned Stevens about
his relationship with M6-shy Stevens
first said he didn't know If he had ever
told Blake that he was attorney for
Murphy, and then said he could not
recOllect. The only conversation he
ever had with Blake and Murphy in the
presence Of both OF them was on Sep
tember 1, but at that time he was moi
Murphys attorney. He became attor-
ney for Murphy after September Is, he
said. Ut was on September 16 tha,
Murphy was indicted)
Both Cook and Langdon asked for
an immediate decision of the matter bx
the court, saying that the grand Jury
had been summoned for o'clock tha,
day and that the district attorneys of
H~N ffco fCAe QcclLOuS OF QlSDOSlnR O1
The matter Langdon pointed out that
Stevens was asked only as to the con-
versations with Blake Tt would hs
absurd. the district attorney said r.
require Murphy's consent to the revela-
tion Of those conversations in which he
took no part.
CITE AUTHORITIES TODAY
After Black had made a short argu-
nnent Judge Sturtevant said the poin,
was an entirely new one on him anc
he wanted the lawyers to cite authori.
ties This they will do at noon TODAY
Owing TO the turn the Stevens case
took before Judge Sturtevant the granf
jury was not able yesterday Afternoon
10 further examine the shifty attorne,
Tor Frank j. Murphy and other indicted
persons. The jury had been called fo,
2 o'clock. After an informal sessior
i adjourned TO meet regularly. on nex,
Tuesday, or earlier if the district at.
tOrney should so desire.