The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1909-06-17

| lagher and Nicholas and attempted at
| length to pick to pieces the story of
the actual offer and payment of the
! bride money. He sought to show con-
| tradictions between the testimony
! given by these witnesses in the pres
ent case and that given by them dur
ing the former graft trials, as well as
| to show discrepancies in their ac-
counts of the same transactions. The
! real essence of the whole argument,
! if not the very cornerstone of the
/ foundation on which the entire struc
tuer of defense has been reared was
| brought out strongly in Moores con-
tention that a fatal weakness existed
in the prosecutions case through fail
ure TO prove that Gallagher ever made
an offer of a bride to Nicholas prior to
the actual payment of the money.
RESTS CASE on THIS
On this single point, Moore argued.
! the ultimate verdict of the jury must
hinge. He did not deny that the testi-
mony of both Gallagher and Nicholas
in the present case was direct and un
/ equivocaI upon this point, but he ar
| gued that their failure to mention this
/ offer on certain former occasions
| proved them guilty of perjury in the
/
! timony with the brand of untruth and
! deliberate manufacture. Should the
| slightest doubt remain in the minds of
! the jurors as to whether direct offer
was made by Gallagher to Nicholas in
so many words the whole case must
/ fall, he declared.
IF there has been no offer" declared
| Moore in summing up this branch of
argument, there has been no crime.
And Mr.. Nicholas comes to you as an
/ accredited periurer to begin with. as
well as confessing himself to have
committed crime after crime. His af-
! fidavit in the Langdon suit convicts
him of perjury. And Gallaghers testi-
mony is worth no more than is Nicho-
las testimony. Nicholas has contra
dicted himself. He has sworn both
ways. He has sworn that he had an
! offer and he has sworn that he had not.
And in the first Ford trial he said he
could not remember exactly what Gal
! Iagher said. God forbid that a man
should be put in stripes on such testi-
| mony as that
In dwelling upon this feature of ar
gument the speaker read copious eX-
| tracts from the record of the various
cases that have been tried. as well as
/ from the original confessions of the
supervisors given at the Gladstone
| apartments and before the grand jury
The substance of the testimony regard
/ ing the direct offer of a bride he de-
nounced as pure fabrication and mass
of untrue testimony No credibility
could attach to the testimony of any
! of the supervisors, he said, because
of their perjury, their former crimes,
the contradictions in their testimony
and the fact that they were under i'm
munity.
IMMUNITY WAS BRIBERY
1T was a bastard kind of immunity
! these supervisors received" he ex-
| claimed, and it was very nearly
bribery if it did not amount to bribery
itself They were given immunity of
kind which the prosecution now an
nounces is not enforceable. 1t was a
contract on the part of the supervisors
to tell the facts as the prosecution
might see these facts from time to
time One or two of these supervisors
have deviated from this straight and
narrow path laid out for them and have
felt the lash. Wilson is one who has
felt the lash, and he is now a pitiful
sight in his, efforts to win back the
favor he has lost. Each time he tes-
titles he feels the Heney lash swish
over him. He is like the picture we
have all seen of the dog sitting be-
fore a phonograph with his ear cooked
to listen to his masters voice. SO
tGalIagher has leaned with one ear
toward Heney until it has become
elongated to catch his masters words
Yes. he is pitiabIe spectacle-the
good dog wilson,
Moore argued that it would have
been physically impossible for CAL
lagher to have stored in a safe deposit
box the amount Of bills which he testi-
fed he had received and thus put
away. BY a system of computation not
entirely explained Moore arrived at the
conclusion that had Gallagher stored
the amount of money he said he did he
would have piled up a stack of cur
rency eight feet high.
.aIIGHT HAVE BEEN FEE,
Suppose this money was paid to Abe
Ruef as fee for services" cried
Moore, suddenly changing the subject
at issue. suppose it were shown that
General Ford actually paid this sum of
5000, 900 into Ruef's hands. Could any
one say that such payment amounted
to anything more than a payment of
money for peace? Ruef was known as
the omnipotent power, not only in con-
nection with the board of supervisors
but in connection with the entire la
Dor situation in this city. Would it
have amounted to bribery if General
Ford had paid money to Ruef to Sc
cure the company's peace? By no
means. If such payment was made
was it not made without any dream of
bribery, without any thought of brib-
cry?
However, gentlemen this is all mere
speculation There is no evidence on
the subject. ] say there is not one
bit Of evidence that Ruef eyer rot one