The San Francisco call., 1909-06-05
Attorney Bacon Moves for Dis
missaI of Complaint Against
Article in The Call
Burke and Finn Deny Interview
and Gallagher Gives His
Opinion of Former

moved yesterday 10 dismiss the charge
preferred by P. H. Mccarthy.
Bacon took the position that the
testimony OF several witnesses who
knew nothing about the facts at issue
aside from having read the alleged
libelous article in The Call was clearly
inadmissible under numerous decisions
OF the courts He pointed out that
aside from this testimony absolutely
10 case had been presented. Judge
" 9rtall was impressed by the attor-
Neys citation OF authorities on this
point and has taken the matter under
Amusement. Briefs covering the mo-
tion TO dismiss viii be submitted TO
the court and the motion will be ar
gued on Tuesday afternoon at half
past o'clock.
DEFENSE MOVES TO DISMISS
The case for the complaining wit
ness was completed by the denials of
Jere Burke and Tom Finn that they
had been at the conference in qUes-
tiOn and by the introduction. over the
strenuous objections OF the defense
OF the testimony OF two readers of the
article that proved so distasteful 10
Mccarthy.
Part OF this testimony. by the way.
Ing position. Jere Burke. chief political
lieutenant Of William r. Herrin, testi-
fed that he had known Mccarthy for
several years. Andrew J. Gallagher
secretary OF the labor council, testi-
hed that he thought Herrin and Burke
unit people for any union labor man TO
associate with. Taken together the
Two statements did not exactly tickle
Mccarthy
When the case for The people was
completed. Judge Shortau called for
the witnesses Of the defense. but At
= torney Bacon announced that the de-
PENDANTS would rest their case and
> move for dismissal on the showing
-rnade by the complaining witnesses.
BURKE DENIES CONFERENCE
- Jere Burke denied that the confer
= ence described in The Call had taken
place He gave a detailed description
>. of the location Of his own and Herrin's
Offices on The eighth floor Of the Flood
building
Mh hen Tom Finn was called he forgot
that he bore the dignity OF a state
senator and mOdestly gave his occu-
patton as clerk. Asked where his
place of business was. he gave II as
- East street that being the loca-
rion OF Senator Tawu'sv booze en-
pOrium- Finn was not asked 10 ex-
plain IN what clerical capacity he was
!, employed in his own saloon. Finn
Swore that the conference had not
taken place as far as he knew
Walter O'Connel. business agent of
the building trades council, took the
stand again for cross examination At
the previous hearing he had told Of
the meaning which he attached 10 the
article in The Call. Attorney Bacon
tried 10 examine him as 10 mis- ac-
tivity in the committee Of q which
line OF questioning was not allowed.
OBJECTION TO TESTIMONY
William H Bemiss. secretary and
and manager Of the san Francisco
building trades council temple asso-
citation and a member OF the committee
or p, was the next witness for Nc
Carthy. When Attorney Cleveland l.
Dam asked him what opinion he had
arrived at from reading the article in
The Call Attorney Bacon renewed his
previous objections 10 this sort OF tes-
timong. He pointed out that the wit
Desses attached entirely different mean
.ngs to the article from that given
IN the complaint
Now comes this witness and he
viii probably make another guess as
70 the meaning OF that article" argued
Bacon This kind Of testimony is in
admissible. Our supreme court has de-
ClQed Elaf lne testimony OF TeaQer
as 10 the meaning of an article lis
.inadnfssible.@
Il see the point; that seems TO be
the rule" said Judge Shortall. when
Bacon had read his authorities; Il am
inclined 70 think that you are right"
TESTIMONY As TO CHARACTER
Bemiss was allowed TO continue on
the understanding that all such testi-
monv would be stricken out If the
cogrt later ruled in favor OF the de-
tense.
A Andrew J. Gallagher was the last
witness called. Subject TO the same
conditions as governed the introduc-
tion OF previous testimony along the
same lines Judge Shortall allowed him
10 tell what he gathered from reading
the article.
What was your understanding con-
cerning P. II Mccarthy after reading
the portions Of the article referred
to-" asked Dam.
Ny understanding was, answered
Gallagher. that II the article was
true Mr. Mccarthy was not fit to as
sociate with
For what reason?'
For the reason that 7 have always
believed that Mr.. Burke and Mr. Her
rim were not At people for any man
connected with organized labor to as
EUCISte WITH. answered the NllneSs.
CASE TO BE ARGUED
At the conclusion OF Gallagher's ex-
animation Bacon announced that the
defense would not put in any evidence.
eve make a motion he said. ITO
dismiss this complaint and discharge
these defendants on the ground that
The people have failed TO show any
faets constituting an offense, or TO
show that the offense has been COM
raitted. or 10 show that there is prob
~bse cause TO believe that these de-
fendants have been guilty OF any Of
fense
All OF these gentlemen have come
before the court and under oath have
denied that they attended that con-
ference said Judge ShortalL Every
one is guilty Of perjury, or they have
been libeled. II the article IS hbelous
--rbe case was continued for argu-
ht until Tuesday June g. al
- p. m
reEoRAMUs RETUREED-An sgno-amus was
,.f,rr7,ed ~ The jury IN the case OF kafael Nar
rilin Mexican from IA Paz lower atlor's1a. s.