The San Francisco call., 1909-02-06

roborative evidence of a very strong
nature to override this prejudice.
Besides that" he told Heney, ST
have read so much that I have an opin-
ion, and / don't want to act on that
account. 1 haven't any prejudice, but
if 1 had it might be in favor of the
defendant"
Despite that" insisted Heney,
would you not try this case fairly and
souarely on the evidence and the in
structions of the court, and on nothing
else?"
Il would try to-" he answered, land
believe I could, but still 1 might be
influenced by my opinions to let the
defendant go regardless of the evil
dence."
Heney's determination TO take Scol-
lard in spite of his statements and his
| expressed doubts Of his own strength
of mind was very apparent by this
time. He refused to take Scollard's
mo" for an answer, and once more
returned to the attack.
WOULD TRY TO BE FAIR
If you were accepted as a juror"
he demanded, would you not use your
utmost endeavors to act fairly and i'm
partially TO both sides?'
"I certainly would try to-" Scollard
answered.
And would you not pass strictly on
the merits of the evidence regardless
of your impressions which now exist?'
Scollard hesitated a moment and then
! squared himself in his seat and an
swered yes"
we pass the Juror" declared Heney.
Stanley Moore asked but single ques-
tion and also passed Scollard.
a harvest of % possibilities was
reaped from the venire of so examined
by the court yesterday morning, 81
members of the panel being excused by
| Judge Lawlor on statutory grounds. A
ninth panel, consisting of rs names,
was ordered for 9 o'clock Monday morn
ing, and the session today will be given
over entirely to the regular examina-
tion of talesmen by the attorneys.
| Most of the examinations yesterday
were without incident and IS talesmen
passed the ordeal John G. Wetmore,
fruit and produce merchant was
in sympathy with Calhoun because he
believed the latter never would have
secured a franchise unless he paid the
supervisors for it, no matter how much
he might have been willing to pay
! legitimately. Wetmore was challenged
by the prosecution, and the next man.
! Harry A SAKE, vice president of Bun
ster SAKE & CO., was challenged by
the defense because of his statement
that he could not give the defendant
the presumption OF innocence ACCORDED
him under the law.
lExCUSED FOR DEAFNESS
John p. Whitney. manufacturers
agent. showed little knowledge of the
graft cases and said that he had never
read nor discussed them at any length.
| However, he was 66 years old and hard
Of hearing. and because of this he was
excused by consent.
n 10 IF %
Mission bank, said that he held a fixed
opinion and that he knew Francis J..
Heney personally and had lunched with
him His opinion was one that would
influence him and he was challenged
by Byington of the defense. Rudolph
Samson a mining broker, believed Cal
houn to be innocent and said that this
opinion could not be changed by evi-
dence. Heney challenged and he was
excused after a denial interposed by
the defense was withdrawn.
Byington challenged Horace II. SEQ
| vel. a hardware merchant, who had
an opinion and asserted that he could
not be fair. Soren Wind of 4s3 San
chez street a musician and dealer in
notions, was unacceptable to the de-
tense because he was a member of the
musicians union and had given finan-
cial support to the union carmen dur
ing the car strike. He was not chal-
lenged on this ground, however, but
excused by consent for business rea-
sons Henry Wilfert, a provision mer-
chant. was excused because of having
l decided opinion.
Joseph NJ. Willard Of 1894 Pine street
was called as a talesman in the last
Ruef trial and dismissed for cause on
the challenge Of Henry Ach of Ruef's
[ counsel He explained this to the
court and was promptly challenged BY
Calhoun's attorneys. Rudolph Winter
provision merchant, and E. j. Wieland
, butcher, were challenged by the de.
I Tense because of the existence of opin-
! ions in their minds
Edward n. Sewall, whose status a!
Q talesman or possible juror is being helC
Z in allegiance pending Judge Lawlor'.
/ decision this morning, was objection
able to the defense on two grounds
9 one reason was that he was membe
: Of the League of Justice and the othe
that he was an employe of the com
= pany with which Rolla V. Watt is con
nected. A. A. Moore made this plail
e when he asserted that SewaIl shoul,
= be disqualified because of his relation
: | with men connected with the prose
!. cution.D Heney answered Moore tart
ly. declaring that Watt was not con
- nected in any way with the prosecution
and never had been. beyond being