The San Francisco call., 1909-03-31

while deplorable in any event, might
have been made thoughtlessly and un
guardedly. The evidence introduced
here. however. leaves the court no room
TO consider the point of whether the
remark might have been made un-
guardedly. The remark itself was well
I calculated to elicit from the person
10 whom it was addressed a counter
remark relating to the subject of this
trial. In view of the fact that the
cause and intention of the remark can
be considered somewhere else do not
deem il necessary to decide here
whether there was any Interior purpose
behind it. The remark itself was Who'll
y unWarranted
William D. Harrington. the court
hereby adjudges you guilty of contempt
Of court. and in punishment therefor it
Is hereby ordered, adjudged and de-
creed that you be confined in the coun-
ty jail of the city. and county of San
Francisco for a period of five days. Let
the commitment issue"
Choynski asked for a stay of judg-
ment and Judge Lawlor consented that
the execution of the sentence should
not begin until noon today. Choynski
declared in this connection, that he had
taken up the case with his client, be-
lieving him 10 be innocent of the con-
tempt charged and that his only ap-
pearance in the case had been to see
that the rights of the respondent were
protected.
MAY INNESTIG ATE FURTHER
Judge Lawlor closed the incident by
calling to Assistant District Attorney
O'Gara's attention the sections of the
code relating to, criminal prosecution
on misdemeanor Charges in cases where
sentences for contempt had been pre-
viously imposed. Though he made no
direct order the reference was taken as
a suggestion that the matter should be
further investigated by the district at
torney's office TO determine the purpose
or intent with which the remark was
made by Harrington to Blender
The investigation of the contempt in
cident was the only subject taken up
BY the court during the afternoon ses-
sion of the trial The jury box was
again filled during the morning ses-
sion Of court, and the trial proper was
continued until this morning for the
exercising of peremptory challenges
against the six jurors who have been
passed to the jury box but have not yet
been finally sworn to try the case. At
$50 o'clock this morning new special
jury venire will be examined by the
court and at II o'clock the peremptory
challenges viii be called for
The talesman accepted TO fill the
twelfth place in the box subject 10 per-
enptory challenge was George G. Gil
lespie, building contractor whose ex-
animation was left unfinished Monday
afternoon Gillespie was questioned at
some length by the attorneys for both
sides and was finally passed without
challenge. Additional questions were
put to Jurors Theodore Binner, Joseph
Z. Clark and Henry c. Graham, who
have been temporarily passed, but all
the inquiries were satisfactorily an
swered and no challenge was interposed
in any case.
SEVEN TALEsMEN EXCUSED
The morning Session of court. after
the acceptance of Gillespie, was de-
voted to the examination of additional
talesmen. but no others were found in
condition of mind TO make them ac-
ceptable as jurors. Those who were
examined and excused were William II.
HildebranGt, Harry p. Hermance.
Thomas Heffron. George H. Heissner,
Charles II. Hook. George H. Homburg
and Fred W. Holman.
Another step was taken yesterday
morning to put stop TO the interfer-
ence of the United Railroads sleuths
with the attorneys engaged in prose-l
cutting the case. when Heney demanded
that the police guard him against the
obnoxious attentions OF W. T. Jory. one
Of Earl Rogers retainers. Jory has been
hanging about the sidewalk in front of
the court room ever since the beginning
of the trial and has made it a practice
to sidIe into every group and listen to
all the conversations he could possibly
hear. He was caught listening to
Heney yesterday morning and later at
tempted TO follow him when he left
the building. Heney complained to the
police in charge and Jory was ordered
to keep away from the vicinity.