The San Francisco call., 1908-11-11
ARGUMENT ON LAW
DELAYS RUFF CASE
Ach Objects to Testimony by
Gallagher to Show Extent
of Bribe Transactions
Judge LawIor Will Rule on the
Point in His New Quarters
in Carpenters Hall

Revision to an extended legal argu-
ment by the attorneys In the Ruef case
called another halt yesterday in the
taking of testimony, and instead of a
day given over to the examination of
witnesses the entire afternoon session
was devoted to discussion of technical
points of law. Following adjournment
last night Judge Lawlor had the fur
niture, records and effects of the court
moved TO the new courtroom in Carpen-
ters hall in Fulton street near Van
Ness avenue, and court will be resumed
this morning in the more commodious
quarters.
A conflict of judgment between the
attorneys of the prosecution and de-
fense concerning the admissibility of
testimony relating to offenses similar
to the one on which the trial is based
brought about the additional delay yes
| terday. The question arose on Ach's
objections TO an attempt by Heney to
draw from eX-Supervisor Gallagher
testimony regarding the Parkside, fight
trust, telephone and gas bribery trans
actions before taking up the details
OF the trolley bribery case for which
Ruef is now on trial.
KEYNOTE OF ENTIRE CASE
AS the question sounds the key
note of the entire case, Judge Law
lor declared that he would listen to
an exhaustive argument on the point
at once and settle the matter at the
very outset.
The jury was relieved from attend
ance after noon and the remainder of
the day given over to argument. but
Judge Lawlor took the matter under
consideration last night, reserving his
decision until this morning.
The objections of the defense to the
introduction of testimony relating to
the various bribery deals in which the
old boodling board of supervisors was
implicated were based on the conten-
tion that these other matters had no
connection with the trolley bribery
case, and that Ruef's possible connec-
tion with those cases could not be
shown as evidence against him in the
trolley case
Ach declared that each alleged
bribery deal must stand alone, as, if
any crimes were committed, there was
no common motive or connection be-
tween them. He argued that admis-
sion of testimony concerning similar
crimes was always a dangerous pro-
ceeding, and that, in the present in
stance, to prove conspiracy in the
gas or telephone matter would in no
way tend to prove Ruef's guilt in the
trolley deal.
COMMON DESIGN ALLEGED
Heney's answer to Ach's argument
was to explain the theory of common
design, under which he alleged the va
rious bribery deals were correlated.
They were all, he asserted, incidents of
a general design on Ruefs part to hold
the board of supervisors together and
absolutely subservient to his will. One
idea, he insisted, ran through all the
bribery deals, and that was Ruef's idea
to strengthen his own political suprem-
acy and force every public service cor
poration or large interest having deal
ings with the board to come to him.
In proof of this theory, Heney referred
to the secret Sunday night caucuses of
the board of supervisors. at which the
boss was always present, to Ruefs own
reference to the supervisors as hungry
pack who would eat the paint off a
| house, and to the statement which
Ruef made to DR.. Poheim that Halsey
had the cheek to try to take his board
of supervisors away from him.
In rebuttal OF the various authorities
cited by Heney yesterday to sustain
his contentious, Attorney Dozier of the
defense asked to be given an oppor-
tunity to produce other authorities this
morning, and will be given some time
for argument before the jury is sum-
moned into court.
George Keane, former clerk of the
board of supervisors, was excused from
the stand after a few questions yester-
day morning, and ex-Supervisor James
L. Gallagher was called to tell his
story of infamy on the witness stand
for the tenth time. Gallagher had
proceeded only far enough to tell of
his election to the board and of the
arrangements made with Ruef for man
aging the board before its members
had been sworn into office, when the
argument over admission of testimony
arose He was temporarily excused
from the stand and the jury was dis
missed.