The San Francisco call., 1909-05-29
ACTING
UNDERLANGDON
SPRINGS TRAP
Demand of S3.OOO From Cal
houn Not to Testify Is Made
by instruction
Attorneys for Defense Argue
Long to Keep Explanation
Out of the Records
By W. RUSSELL COLE


More details Of the attempt made by
fhe defense in the calhoun case 10
keep John II. Helms. former chief of
tle Emitted Railroads detectives. of the
witness stand and TO suppress an eNi-
Geacc relating 10 the theft Of reports
rrom W. J. Burns office. the bribery
9of some of Burns employees and other
secret transactions were brought out
at The trial Yesterday afternoon.
Helms was recalled to the witness
stand by the prosecution and his eN-
aninatiou was resumed at the point
where IT was interrupted several days
ago. when ii became necessary TO lay
81 further foundation for some Of his
testimony. The witness related how
he bad been approached at his home in
Rutb Trinity county by Wingheld. :.
Lamb. the acknowledged agent OF
AIonzo ]. Monroe and indirectly the
gent Of the defendant Patrick Cal
houn. lie declared that Lamb re-
sorted 10 fraternal relation in an
effort 10 pledge him 10 secrecy and
men told him that if he would stand
ls ground and refuse to take the
witness stand he would be well cared
for by lhe United Railroads
The direct testimony Of Helms was
interrupted before 1t had progressed
very far by a legal argument whi~a
developed from the prosecutions en-
deavor to show exactly the instrue-
1ions from District Attorney Langdon
1T this city under which Helms was
acting at The time of the converse
tiou with Lamb. Helms testified that
-Ryhen Lamb gave him the rnessag &c
from Monroe he told Lamb that he
would remain silent ii the United Rail
roads would pay him $4,000 II was
when Assistant District Attorney
feuey asked questions intended 10
show Helms motives in demanding this
bribe taat the disruption OF proceed
ings occurred.
For nearly an hour the attorneys
for the defense fought strenuously TO
keep the sought for testimony out Of
fbe record AS the testimony now
stands Helms stands convicted by his
own statement of seeking briDe, and
to have this declaration left as il is
without explanation is what the oe-
felSc is lighting for Tie argument.
of course. was not based on such an
admission. bur upon technical OBJ
lection 10 testimony concerning any
conversations between the witness and
officers of this city as inadmissible.
ACTING Under INsTRU CTIONs
Heney showeS the real motive Of tht
objection in tN course of his owr
argunent on Tie point at issue II,
had the right. he protested, to prove
that in demanding bribe from Lamf
the witness was merely acting under
The Instructions OF District Attorney
d.angdon. in pursuance of plan tc
trap the defendants agents and the
further right 10 prove Helms honesty
~ purpose by showing that the latter
reported every detail of the conver-
sation with Lamb 10 Langdons repre-
sentatives Immediately after the tall
occurred The defense. however, would
have it appear from the record thai
Helms was actually seeking a bribe
in The end the question at issue wa.
taken under consideration by Judge
LaWlor, TO be ruled upon when the
irial is resumed next Tuesday morn
ing.
a new disclosure made in the course
of Helms testimony was that when hs
came 10 san Francisco last autumn and
sought employment under Specia
Agent Burns. he told Burns and Lang
don of the systematic robbery OF the
formers office thar had been going OF
for months under the direction Of vii
liam N. Abbott. lie was employed for
the particular purpose of unearthine
th5s plot and discovering the identIu
Of Burns own employees who were i'm
plicated in it, and it was with this
understanding that he sought employ
ment for a second time under Abbot
and pretended to work for the latte
while actually reporting to Burns
Helms testified that after leavine
Burns employ in February he rename,
at his home in Trinity county unit
May %. when he was subpenaed to re
turn to san Francisco as witness il
the case against y n Handlon. charge,
with Implication in the theft OF th.
official reports. 1T was for this singl.
purpose that ne made the trip to SaI
francisco
Did YOU make any objection to com
ing. or were any threats held out al
10 what might happen to YOU If yol
refused 70 Gomez asked Heney.
= came freely and voluntarily an,
there were no threats, answere,
Helms
After YOU got here were YOU pre-
vented from talking TO any one con
nerted with the United Railroads o.
from going TO the corDpanys Office
II YOU had pieased2" questioned Heney
Il was not
Did you freely and voluntarily ma k
AN affidavit AZ that time concernin,
the matter Of stolen reports and othe
things 10 which YOU have testihe,
here2"
Il did make such an affidavit an,
lefi q with Mr.. Burns
ACCOMPANIED RY DETECTIVE
During this visit Helms also receive,
the authorization Of the district at
Observation-Disclosures.