The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1908-12-10
RUEF'S CASE IN
HANDS Of JURY
Closing Argument for the State
Made by Hiram Johnson,
Serving Without Pay.
END OF REMARKABLE TRIAL
uENEY IN COURT AS A WITNESS
IN MURPHY CASE.


$-r, rrs,cisco Dec. 10.-The read
- IF the testimony of the three SUI
Ile a.,,;so~s was finished and the jury
= retired at 12:25 o'clock TINS MOI INNS
= "a deliberate or take ballot .
inst before retiring one OF the 1u-
ro~s asked the court to oeIlhe the
5fffareoce between an offer 10 DrlDe
and the receiving OF a DrlDe.
~A4+++%@@%<<++ ~
ca, Francisco. Dec. s.-The case OF
.hrsbam Ruef. charged with bribery OF
% torn,er supervisor Of this city, went u
-h.. turv at 1886 D. m. today. At 5:4'' aitei
,,a,-i,,, been out two hours and nine MIN
ties the Jury requested and was gwen
.-,,,ssio, n 90 TO dinner by Judge VIII
liam P Lawlor, but was ordereu u
sumo deliberations at O'CLOCK g.,
T,,roughout the last day OF the trlai'
vrbich has required 105 days 10 orlns "a
a conclusion. the court room va - ."oco
with men and women or local proIll.i a ~ a
The unusual precautions taken aitgT - my
-Lootiup- of Prosecutor Francis j. heno5
we're resumed today in fuli lorce, 81 81
me spectators subjected 10 close SCI uCiIlS
before entry, were surrounded Dy teS tSs
detail of police at every stage u
proceedings
Closing Argument.
uiram Johnson. one of the attorneys
who volunteered his services [E srg 1r1v at
Houe' oftor an address of two hours ana
half during when uIne ne &c 1S',-a
-. .-g,Innents set forth by the DEFENSE
and advanced many otheIs VL II -rosoc,Il
Saeking TO put the case OF the PIoseS :
ar before the jurors in the FORM ol a
closely connected chain OF events VIZ
aha attendant as center. he cnaISeu IND.
Ruef had practically adIhltIeu iilS Ia IL h.
mon more than one occasion, ana ne
maintained that the defense hau never
shaken the testimony Of witnesses VINO VINO
charged Ruef with receiving S2OJ.V" ltoIII
the United Railroads ana WIN s lNLils
for,,ar Supervisor James l.. Gallagher
81 099 70 be distributed among the mem
T6e instructions of the court were de-
Iivered after a slight delay ana con-
rrary 10 expectations occupied but an hour
in delivery.
Ruef Was Nervous.
During the first hour that the jury re-
r,aiued secluded Ruef paced nervously
nm and down the aisle, occasionally stop
ming TO sneak o acquaintances, and often
Sinking into b. seat, where ne appeared
bowed in thought, his back turned TO the
spectators
efforts in behalf of his client have several
times threatened him with a penalty OF
uhvgical collapse. did not appear IN court
his afternoon, and IL was reported that
he had been stricken with pleurisy during
The noon recess as a result OF cold con-
tracted last night. after he had completed
an address Of six hours and twenty min
utes.
History of the Case.
one of the most remarkable trials in
the history of California will end with
The discharge of the jury that is tonight
considering the fate CT Abraham Ruef,
charged with the bribery of former
supervisor OF this city.
Both in duration and by reason OF the
startling and unusual occurrences that
have attended its progress the trial has
attained position as the most important
outgrowth of the exposures of the sum
mer of 1906. when a grand jury. after
hearing the confessions of sixteen mem
hers Of the board of supervisors, returned
scores of indictments charging bribery
against the supervisors. Mayor Eugene e.
Schmitz and against Ruef, then recog-
nized as the political head of the admin
istration. and against officials of the
street railway system. the gas and cleo
tric company. two telephone companies,
a realty company and a quartet of prize
fight promoters.
Former Trials.
In addition to several trials in which
the alleged associates of Ruef figured as
defendants. Ruef himself has twice ap-
peared 10 answer one of the scores Of in
Hictments pending against him. In the
first case, wherein Ruef was charged
with extorting money from the propria-
tor OF a French restaurant, the defendant
pleaded guilty. at the same time pro-
testing his innocence. The case was aft
erwards reversed by the higher courts
In the second trial. upon a charge of hav-
ing bribed supervisors in the application
Of the Parkside Realty company for a
trolley franchise. the jury disa greed after
many hours % elaboration.
The pending trial was upon an indict-
ment charging Ruef with bribinC former