The San Francisco call., 1909-01-26

ard Groves Of 73s Clay street. florist.
might qualify in the same class with
Mcguire, so far as lack of influencing
opinion was concerned. The promise
was disappointing, however, for after
stating that he had no opinion as to
Calhoun's guilt or innocence the tales
man admitted that he did have some
ideas on the general subject of graft,
principally to the extent that the su-
pervisors accepted bribes. Moore tried
to secure an admission from Groves
that he had read the transcript of the
supervisors testimony before the grand
jury, published in The Call, but the
talesman was positive that he had not
done so, remembering distinctly that
he had seen the paper, but had been too
busy to read any more than the head
lines at the time. Asked his opinion
regarding the granting of immunity to
the supervisors, he answered:
1T wasn't my fight and 1 didn't take
sides one way or the other"
If you were in Calhoun's position
in your own state of mind as jurorsg
asked Moore.
4 would"
Wouldn't you prefer L men with
out any opinion Whatsoever"
no. sir" was the positive answer,
because 1 still have my own mind and
would not let any preconceived opinion
influence me-
Though asserting that he stood abso-
lutely impartial and that he honestly
felt that he could give both sides of
the case fair and just consideration,
Groves was finally forced by Moore to
admit that he might be unconsciously
influenced by his opinion. Moore had
found the opening he had been seeking,
and when Groves added that it might
take evidence to remove his opinion
OGara allowed Moore's challenge to
stand without denial.
HENEY AND MOORE CONFLICT
An effort by Stanley Moore to ascer-
tain by circuitous questioning the state
Of feeling which it was denied him
to inquire into by direct questions, led
to an extended argument between him
and Heney during the examination of
the next talesman. Volney w. Win
chen of $50 Lake street, a paint manu-
facturer Winchen said that he had a
decided opinion regarding Calhoun S
guilt or innocence and Moore immedi-
ately asked him if he would be willing
TO have u jurors in his own state Of
mind judge his case if he were in Cal
houn's position.
Heney's objection was that an an
sWer to this question would indicate
the direction Of the jurors bias, which
is not permitted as a subject of inquiry
prior to challenge. Although the tales
man already had indicated his leaning
in favor of Calhoun by answering yes"
before Heney could enter his objec-
tiOn, the latter persisted in demanding
a ruling.
ITO allow that question to be asked, .
he said, is to say that the supreme
court can be fooled by a clever lawyer.
1t means that result can be obtained
by indirection, which is positively pro-
hibited by direct means"
A. A. Moore answered that the court
was not concerned with the result of a
question itself, and that unless the very
question at issue was tabooed the court
had no authority to refuse it on the
ground that the answer, taken with
another, might develop any fact. Sew
eral cases We're cited, and Judge Law
lor finally allowed the jurors answer
TO stand. He, however, told the prose-
cution to continue the questioning of
the juror and Heney disqualified Win
chell with a single question. His chal-
lenge was not resisted by the defense.
Theodore Gruenhagen Of 1907 Hyde
street, candy manufacturer, had a
/ fixed opinion that would settle his YER
dict regardless of evidence He be-
/ lieved that the granting of immunity
was the proper thing to do in the case
! of the supervisors and the defense
challenged II. J. Grauerholz, a whole
sale liquor dealer, living al 35I San
Carlos avenue, was disposed of just as
quickly and for like cause George A.
/ Kline of 1701 Bush street. manufacture
er's agent also had an opinion and was
challenged.
+
ance man. admitted a strong bias in
/ favor OF the prosecution, declaring that
'it was mighty bright day for our
city" when Immunity was given the su-
pervisors in return for their confess
sions. He had consulted Heney several
times regarding the prosecution of the
California safe deposit and trust com
pany officials. as he had been a demos
itor and had lostsi in the crash of that
institution A challenge interposed bv
Stanley Moore was not denied by the
prosecution.
OTHER TALESMEN DISQUALIFIED
Other talesmen who were disqualified
in short time on account of admissions
OF decided opinions concerning Cal
houns guilt or innocence We're John w.
King Of S245 Twenty y-second street.
grocer; David A Mexican OF 62S Lake
4 street, an engineer employed BY the
Pacific hardware and steel company:
Thomas i. Kiernan of IS Converse
street master plumber; Ernest E. HoI-
lensteiner of 1719 Baker street. a gro
Ger: Charles p. Holt of 1884 Cough
street, manufacturer Of wagon and car
riage materials. and james Madison of
2250 Vallejo street, dealer in dried
fruits.
David Holsberg was under examina-
ton when adjournment was taken at
1890 o'clock. He is a jeweler and on
tician. residing at 1929 Geary street.
and as far as his examination had pro-
/ gressed it failed to shake his f,rst
statement that he had no opinion which
would prevent him giving both sides a
fair and impartial trial. Phillip Zim-
norman Of Eighteenth and Shotwell
streets will be the first talesman exam
ined after the Holzberg inquiry is con
cluded this morning. The case will be
resumed at $3.50 o'clock.
-ac