The San Francisco call., 1909-06-04

the city in advance for expenses?" con-
tinued Heney
mo. sir; it does not"
And when the bill is put in to the
city do you receive payment prompt
ly?"
mo, as a rule it is pretty slow"
Has there been anything in particu-
lar that has prevented you recently
from getting it as promptly as usual?''
Stanley Moore OF the defense was on
his feet and interposed an objection
before Burns could answer the question.
The objection was sustained, but on
cross examination Moore opened the
way for a renewal of the inquiry,
which Heney promptly reverted to on
redirect examination.
Are you getting any money from
the city now?" he asked.
No" answered Burns. there is an
Injunction against our salaries
DO you know who got out this in
Junction.
"A man named Burke"
And do you know who his attorney
is?"
Yes, it is William H Metson"
Heney endeavored to show that the
superior, court had failed TO sustain
the injunction and that the case had
been appealed, but was met with an
other objection. He responded by de-
claring that the defense was attempt
ing to make it appear to the jury that
the injunction had been held valid, and
announced his intention of calling
Burke to the stand and sitting the
matter to the bottom.
MOORE Is REPRIMANDED
Letting down more bars" inter-
rupted A A. Moore. referring to
Heney's former statements that he
would '1et down the bars" concerning
all matters related to the trial. The
ejaculation by the senior member of
Calhoun's counsel was delivered in such
tones as caused Judge Lawlor to rep
rimand him severely.
Mr.. Moore, you will dispense with
that form of conduct" he ordered
Stanley Moore hurried to the rescue
with a request that Heney also be ad-
monished by the court to refrain from
using a loud tone, and demanded to
know If such indulgence in loud talk"
did not constitute bad conduct on the
part of the district attorney as well
as on the part of counsel for the de-
fense.
This closed the incident and Burns
was excused from the stand shortly
afterward. George B. Wilcutt, secre-
tary of the United Railroads. was re-
called to the stand and read the by
laws Of the company referring to the
rights of officials to order expenditures
Of the company's money for any pur-
pose. Attorney King of Calhoun's
counsel precipitated long argument
BY objecting to the admission of this
testimony on the ground that it was
an attempt to pry into the company's
business affairs. and ended by chal-
enging the motives of the prosecu-
ion in offering the testimony.
MONEY PAID TO BROWN
'Tn tell you what our purpose is
Heney. 1T is to show that
money was paid by the treasurer of
his company to Luther G. Brown and
10 show that the payment was author
5ed by this defendant We want to
bring home to Mr.. Calhoun the fact
that he authorized this payment to
Luther G. Brown, and to show that
this money was used in bribing Off
-ials of this city and county for the
purpose Of obstructing the course of
Justice in this case"
The excerpt from the bylaws were
read into the record and Wilcutt was
asked several questions regarding the
conduct of the company's business.
He testified that William NJ Ahhot+
was known as general attorney. for
ne company, but that no authorization
Tor the creation of any such office had
ever been given by the bylaws or nv
-esoiution of the board of directors of
The COMPANY