The San Francisco call., 1909-08-13
OPINIONS BRING
ANOTHER CLASH
NCALHOUNCASE
Langdon Resents ImputatiOn
That Any Other Than Off
..
T.. Gals Granted Immunity
Attempt of Defense's Counsel to
Discredit Graft Prosecution
Proves Boomerang

Now and again, when talesman
favoring the defense is found at the
trial OF Patrick Calhoun. the traction
magnate's attorneys strive 10 hold
the man in the box as long as Judge
Lawlor's patience viii allow, while they
attempt TO secure material for their
boushten new spapers. One talesman
fsvoring the defense often has sup
piled answers sufficient to fill column
Of CaJhoun's paper. under the careful
nursing. OF the graft lawyers, de-
nouncing the prosecution.
The trick was played once too often
yesterday for the patience of District
Attorney Lsngdon. however, and, catch
ing up one OF the replies drawn out OF
4 tsIesman by Lewis Byington, he
drove home a logical series of ques-
lions that quite changed the complexion
Of the situation and left the horde OF
Calhoun attorneys far from glad that
they had employed such tactics.
SEIZE OPINIoNATED TALESMAN
David c. Norcross of 22OO Devisadero
street. secretary of the Western fuel
company. was the talesman the defense
seized upon to supply the daily dose
..of. "opinions" for Calhoun's newspaper
and the real inquiry was not begun, as
.Iu6ge Lswlor pointed out later in cen
,suring the defense, until after Nor
cross had disqualified himself by the
statement that he had strong opinion
Bvfngton asked the talesman who
lad shown a leaning toward Calhoun
his opinion regarding the Immunity ar
= rangements made with the supervisors
2 and Norcross replied that he did not
approve Of such action.
. Lsngdon took up the questioning
starting with the simple query 10 the
-talesman whether or not he knew what
the supervisors had done Norcross
stated that they had accepted bribes.
And now was evidence of this fact
10 be secured2' asked Langdon.
i do not know" came Norcross
reply.
Isngdon further drew from the tales
man the admission that he actually
did believe that the supervisors had
been paid money by the United Rail
roads. and thought there was guilt
on both sides. In spite Of this, how
ever, the talesman repeated that he
had q fixed opinion
Bvington once more entered the
battle with the remark:
CHALLENGES IMMUNITY CHARGE
DO YOU know, Mr.. Norcross. thai
the district attorney signed those i'm
nauuitv contracts with James L. Gala.
CHER and the other supervisors and
then declared they were illegal and no.
binding upon hims Do you remember
that Rudolph Spreckels made all the
arrangements for immunity and thai
the district attorney merely signed the
contracts?"
IT was at this remark that Langdor
rose to combat.
7 have sat here and allowed these
questions TO be asked without protest.
the district attorney said, but 1 dc
not propose to allow this to pass un-
challenged If I remain silent it might
be thought that the counsers state
meuts are correct and true, when the
counsel knows, or ought to know, that
they are not correct and far from the
truth. Counsel knows, or should know
that whatever part Rudolph Spreck-
els took in this matter was done at the
viii Of the district attorney, and in
no other way
IN reply TO derogatory remark by
ByingtOn LangdOn again sprang TO his
feet
4 am determined, Mr.. Byington." h,
bait me. 1 am determined that yoI
will not succeed in having me charged
with misconduct before this jury. Blu
] do lot propose that the jury or any
one else shall get the idea that Mr.
Spreckels or any one else arranged e
give the supervisors immunity on hi,
word only, when II is a known fac
that only the district attorney car
grant and did grant the immunity
This Notwithstanding the boughter
papers"
Stanley Moore at this point aros,
and declared al great length tha
Lsngdon should be cited for miscon
duct, and the court wearily stated tha.
controversies calculated to affect tn,
judgment OF the jurors should b,
avoided.
BLAMEs CALHOUN ATTORNEYS
The court pointed out to the crest
fallen defense attorneys that Byingto1
himself had precipitated the exchane.
OF words. Byington, ready to end tn,
matter now as quickly as possible, pu
TO the tslesman the simple query re
Earding his fitness to serve in the case
Norcross answered that he could no
be an impartial juror, Langdon chal
lenged and the matter ended.
The temper OF the defense attorney,
was undoubtedly ruf1ed by the testi
mony OF talesman, William A. Mel
son, who was examined a few minute,
before Norcross was called to tn,
stand. Nelson declared that he wa,
Of the fixed opinion that the supervis
ors got $4,000 from the United Rail.
roads and that this opinion was 81
strong that he could not call himsel
an impartial juror
In all yesterday q talesmen wer,
examined. This makes 3s2 that hay,
been called into the box and examined
Two OF these have been accepted a.
temporary jurors and three are still
under examination.
Taxfcabs for Rent