The San Francisco call., 1909-01-15

insurance broker and honorary union
member, had ideas about the car strike
that did not rebound 20 Calhoun's fa-
vor and also said that it would take
great quantity of evidence to overthrow
his opinion concerning Calhouns guilt
or innocence He was challenged, as
was also John p Amos, receiving teller
of the Hibernia bank, who had an opin-
ion so fixed that he could tell what his
action as a juror would be in spite of
any evidence that might be produced.
TaIesman Is Questioned
Though his name failed to appear on
the assessment roll, frank D. Carleton,
MIA, did not escape the rigor of exam
ination, for the defense refused to exer-
else challenge at the outset on the
legal ground and insisted on right to
question the talesman. Carleton, who
has been a resident of San Francisco
for only about two years, had never de-
veloped any set ideas concerning graft
subjects and thought he could be fair.
The defense passed him and Heney took
him in hand to feel out his attitude at
greater length. Carleton was frank In
his statements and evidenced a SINGER
ity and interest that drew from Heney
long explanation of principals.
Carleton declared that he favored
the stamping out of graft and that
while anti-prosecution doctrines had
been preached to him he was willing to
! give ear to opposite views. Heney took
him at his word and explained at length
| the motives behind the giving of the
immunity contracts and the reasons
why certain policies had been adopted
| by the prosecution. The attorneys for
Calhoun objected strenuously to the
little lesson that was being taught, but
Carleton leaned forward with interest
and nodded approvingly as Heney made
his points. 1t was all done in the form
of hypothetical questioning, but the
effect was attained and though Heney
eventually challenged the talesman 1t
was not because Carelton showed any
prejudice against the prosecution. In
fact. he had won a convert, for at the
noon hour Carleton waited to speak
with him again and expressed his salts
faction al the turn his case had taken.
Clash With Moore
During the course of Carleton's ex-
animation A a. Moore attempted sew
eral times to interrupt. charging that
Heney was endeavoring to expatiate on
his case and defend mistakes which he
had made in his past course. Heney
responded with vigor to Moore's chal-
lenge and dared the latter to call him
to the stand as witness when the case
subject. He reminded Moore that the
offer had been made before and that
Moore had refused to accept 1t on the
occasion of any one of the three Ford
trials.
William de Coursey was excused al
the beginning of the afternoon session
because his name did not appear on the
assessment roll and Robert F. Haigh
followed him, under challenge for cause
Peter Antilles Sr. of 763 San Jose ave.
nue. was the second talesman to be
passed for cause and allowed to remair
in the jury box subject to peremptor,
challenge. This did not occur, however
until Moore had challenged him or
the strength of his statement that hs
believed the supervisors were bribeC
by somebody. Who this somebod,
might be the Juror could not say, moi
Il ho - 4
Anthes had every earmark of th.
typical juror. being retired mine,
who has given a great deal of tim.
to the reading of newspapers, but with
out prejudging any man on the strength
of hearsay testimany. He acknowi
miliarity with the general graft situa
tion, but said that in spite of this h,
could give the defendant fair and i'm
partial trial.
The acceptance of Antilles marked the
end of progress for the day, for none
of the talesmen who followed came
near the mark. David Hackett, a DIR,
goods merchant of 1857 Sixteenth street
was the first to fall, the challenge in
terposed against him being based OF
his statement that he believed the su.
pervisors took a trolley bribe and tha
Calhoun paid it.
Challenge Is Allowed
! William H. HAZEL. manufacturer
explained an unusual state of mind
AS an individual he said that his idea.
concerning calhoun's guilt were de.
cided and that it would take strons
evidence to change them. but as .
juror he believed he could set thes,
individual views aside and give tn,
defendant fair and impartial trial
acting entirely In an impersonal ca.