The San Francisco call., 1909-06-08
BURNS
RFPORTSGO IN
AS EVIDENCE
Defense Fails in Final Desper=
ate Effort to Prevent Their
Introduction
Detective SCHNEIDER Denies AL
legged Comments on Juror
Arthur
By W. RUSSELL COLE

The picking up of loose ends Of testi-
mony. which included the inspection
and comparison Of the bundle of stolen
jury reports recovered from William
NJ. Abbotts safe in the March raid.
constituted the procedure in the Cal
houn case yesterday After weeks Of
effort by the defense to keep the stolen
reports OUT OF evidence the sheaf Of
yellow sheets was finally admitted yes
terday and a number OF the reports
were shown to the jurors.
Raymond SCHNEIDER. the assistant
special agent who had charge of the
films Of original jury reports in the
Office of William J. Burns and who
identified most Of the copies recovered
from ,he United Railroads. was on the
witness stand during the afternoon and
was under cross examination by At
1orney Earl Rogers OF the defense
when adjournment was taken at 5
O'Clock
SCHNEIDER DENIES INSINUATIoNS
Schindler's denial of insinuations
that have been made by the defense
regarding the report on James L Ar
thur. a juror peremptorily challenged
by the defense during the impeachment
OF the jury in the present trial, was
the most important bit of testimony
elected Unable. after the stolen re-
ports were recovered from their hiding
place in Abbotts safe, to deny the
charges of theft. the attorneys for
Patrick Calhoun attempted TO cloud
the issue and win a measure of public
favor away from the prosecution by
charging that unfair methods had been
employed by the prosecuting officials
In this connection the Arthur report
was cited and made much of by the
defense Attention was called to the
fact that the Arthur report contained
the statement that he was the most
prejudiced juror in favor of the prose
cution" that the signer of the report
had ever interviewed. and that ''he
would hang out for conviction until
dOomsday- SCHNEIDER was said to
have admitted making such statements.
and it was asserted that the prosecut-
ing attorneys had endeavored to retain
Arthur on the jury while knowing him
TO be biased and partial. To make this
charge the defense was practically
forced 10 admit that the reports were
stolen.
SCHNEIDER yesterday denied that he had
made the statements attributed to him,
and also questioned the authenticity of
the report Instead of it being a par
ticular one which he had recognized as
his own, he declared positively that
among the several hundred recovered
it was the single one which he had been
unable to identify. He called attention
10 the fact that instead of being type
written on yellow paper in uniformity
with the other reports IL was written
on white sheet pasted on the yellow
page, and that it contained no initials
at the bottom as a signature.
Don't you remember saying at the
time that report was taken from the
safe that you recognized it as your
own, and that it contained the state
ments Arthur made to you when you
interviewed him2" asked Earl Rogers.
Didn't you say, That's my report It's
no wonder you challenged him?"
NOTICED REPORT UNUSUAL
No; I didn't make any such state
ment." answered the witness. TIL tell
you what ] did say. l showed it to
Assistant District Attorney Harrison
and told him that ! didn't recognize it.
called attention to the white paper
pasted on the yellow and told Harrison
Audls Hnlle recognized most OF the
substance of ii as what Arthur had told
me, I was not sure about the report
being one from our office. 1 told him
he would have 10 take the responsibility
OF removing it. because 1 couldn't iden-
tify il. He said 10 take it, but in order
to distinguish il from the others he had
it wrapped up in a separate package"
VIII you swear you didn't make
those statements / have asked you
abOut2" demanded Rogers.
Til swear that the statement in the
Globe that i said 1 recognized ii by nv
initials is not true. There are no
initials on it,
But isn't that your statement in that
report which says that Arthur is the
most prejudiced man you ever inter
viewed. and that. if taken on a Jury.
he would hang out until doomsday for
conviction2'
Absolutely. that is not my state
ment," answered SCHNEIDER. "I never
AT any time turned in any report that
had statement OF my beliefs on il.
You can look through hundreds and
hundreds of my reports and you will
not find single one in which I have
ever expressed an opinion"
Rogers asked If IL was not a fact
that the search was actually conducted
by Burns men" and that the police
men nomlnaily IN charge were really
nothing more than onlookers.
NO" answered SCHNEIDER, although
il is true that Russell and myself
looked over the reports in order to
Identify them"
Did any policeman look at a single
psper2' questioned Rogers.
Yes; and I'll tell you what one of
them was" returned the witness. I'VE
fourd a dynamiting report in Mr.. Cal
houn's private safe and that was
looked over by the policemen. 1t was
a report originally made by Macy, one
OF Mr.. Burns men, regarding the Will
Delm matter in connection with the
Gallagher dynamiting. 1 had not seen
it in Mr. Burns office prior to that
and did not take it because l was not
sure il was one Of our reports. / have
since discovered that it was one OF
Mr.. Burns reports"
ROGERS FAILS TO DIsQUALIFY
Don't you know that the paper you
saw in Mr.. Calhoun's safe was not such
report" demanded Rogers. Don't
you know that it was a statement
made by Mr. Macy TO Mr.. CaIhoun's
attorneys and that it never saw Mr.
Burns ofiice2"
Il don't know anything of the kind"
answered the witness. Il know it be-