The San Francisco call., 1909-04-24
CALHOUN'S MEN
CONTINUE THEIR
TRICKY TACTICS
Attempt Made to Introduce a
Single Paragraph of Affidavit
Made by Gallagher
Heney Meets the Issue Squareiy
and Court Will Give Ruling
- Monday Next
By ". Russell Cole


James l. Gallagher's cross examina-
.ton in the Calhoun trial was concluded
yesterday after two days and half OF
constant effort on the part of Attor-
ney A. A Moore to break down the
damaging declarations contained in the
former supervisors direct testimony
and TO discredit him as witness. At
noon Moore brought the long inquiry
10 an end and turned Gallagher over
TO Assistant District Attorney Heney
FOR redirect examination.
The trial progressed but little yes
terdsy, for the trend of animation
centered around the testimony already
in evidence and consisted almost en-
1frely OF repetition and reiterstion of
detail Tactics OF obstruction have
been brought into play by the defense,
5ast as they have been in every other
graft trial, and hours have been spent
ssn futile endesvOr 10 trip the witness
into making statements contra6icting
vital portions of his testimony in for
.mer trials.
. Following the general attack upon
-CSaSiagher's credibility. begun at the
very outset OF the cross examinatiO
Moore yesterday introduced into evil
@dence the affidavit signed by Gallagher
,the attempt by Ruef TO steal the dis
Strict attorneys Office, in which the af-
,fiants swore that they had never com
mitted a felony while in Office. This
AFFIDAVIT was a part Of the answer fled
by Ruef in response TO Langdons
suit enjOining interference with his de-
partment Tt was signed by all the
supervisors under orders from Ruef
and has since been used in every graft
trial as a means OF attack upon the
FeEacity OF the supervisors who sub
scribed to it,
BALKS TRICK OF DEFENSE
Instead of introducing this answer as
= whole. however, Moore insisted upon
reading but a single paragraph from
rs Is pages Of typeWritten matter
and putting this excerpt into evidence
without showing the context. There
was 3. decided objection from the prose-
cutiOn TO this method Of procedure and
Eeney's first step on receiving the wit
ness for redirect examination was TO
offer the entire answer as a part of i
the record The long argument which /
followed resulted in a ruling favorable
20 the prosecution. and the legal docu-
sInent was read to the jury
Going still further into the attempt
10 exhaust the subject of the false
AFFIDAVIT, Heney propounded several
questions intended 10 show the motives
which prompted Gallagher and the
other supervisors 10 subscribe to its
contents. This did not accord Nith
the theory Of the defense. which was
simply 10 allow the false statement 10
stand without explanation. and there
was storm Of protest against the ad-
mission OF the testimony which Heney
wished 10 bring out. This time the
jury was excused from the courtroom
and the question al issue was thrashed
out in an argument which continued
FOR more than half an hour.
COURT RESERVES DECISION
The stand taken by the defense was
that a false sworn statement having
been shown to have been made By the
witness. ii was immaterisl what mo-
tives or surrounding circumstances
prompted him 10 perjure himself II
was argued that the contradictory tes-
timony should be allowed 10 stand
alone and unexplained for the consid-
GRAFTON Of the jury. Heney contended I
on the other hand, that the prosecu-
tion had every right to show the cir
cumstances under which Gallagher's
81 signature was secured TO the false af-
sfdavit and to prove that he was actu-
sted By motives which prompted him
TO take the step in the belief that IL
was the only way TO save himself in a
desperate situation. The whole SUBJ
sect was argued at length and finally
submitted 10 the court but Judge Law
dor reserved his decision on the admis-
sIbility Of the evidence until Monday
lmorDing.
With the ruling relating TO the ad-
mission of testimony concerning the
signing OF the notorious affidavit held
in allegiance Heney directed the exam
ination OF Gallagher TO the subject
, ,cf conditions existing in San Fran
cisco Immediately after the FIRE. he
asked Gallagher If IL were not true
Il LIS nd of q
houses of the United Railroads We're
left ia fair condition. and introduced
testimony tending 10 show that even
temporary permit for overhead trolley
construction on the companys lines
WAS not necessary At the same time,
FEeney admitted that there was no op-
tposition TO the granting Of tempo
s-arv permit and declared that ne would
prove that Ruef and Calhoun knew
this and also that the general sentiment
was against a long term franchise and
that in consequence they deliberately
DELAYED fling the application for
franchise until the very day IL was
passed.
NEWSPAPER CLIPPINGS
Heney handed Gallagher a number Of
newspaper clippings relating 10 condi-
tons after the FIRE and TO the attitude
rof the public generally toward the
franchise question. He asked Gal
|HKnEF
any OF them. but the response was
slow. and Heney finally said he would
take time FOR this outside OF court in
stead OF having the witness examining
The clippings on the stand. There was
an objection from the defense TO
F5enev's proposal, but the latter re-
soonded that even II his opponent in
tended to fnsinuate that undue infiu-
ence would be used TO cause Gallagher
10 remember the articles in question lie
intended to carry out the suggestion
ANYHOW Judge Lawlor also held that
ii would be a waste Of time to have the
witness examine a large number Of
clippings on the stand and instructed
the prosecution 10 have it done out OF
court.
When the cross examination was re-
surned yesterday morning A. A. Moore
questioned Gallagher at further length
concerning his meetings with Rudolph
spreckels at the time the subject OF
f5rlrnunitv was under discussion and his
subsequent talks with the members Of
'she board OF supervisors in caucus Gal
h CHER refused 70 state. as Moore tried
10 have him 90. that Spreckels or any
other person connected with the prose-