The San Francisco call., 1909-02-19


conduct" cried Moore, suddenly realiz-
ing that It made a difference on whose
foot the shoe pinched.
Well I happen TO know that you
have them" retorted Heney, for I've
had FIVE or six of them following
me around until I've had to warn them
to keep their distance"
Hammond, who had been the most
inactive participant in his own exam
nation. was finally allowed to ex-
press himself. He stated that he had a
strong opinion concerning the guilt or
innocence of the defendant and was
promptly challenged and excused.
These skirmishes of the afternoon
were but the echoes of a running bat
tie that occupied almost the entire
morning session, with Ferdinand A.
Haber of 2476 Broadway, a retired
wine expert, as the bone of contention.
Heney didn't want Haber on the jury
under any circumstances and made 1T
plain from the start, while the defense
did want him and passed him without
challenge.
Haber began with a statement that
he loved the simple life and found his
greatest Joy in his flowers, his books
and his friends, but 1t was anything
but the simple life that he was leading
before his examination was terminated.
He was a juror sworn in the Ruef eX-
tortion case at the time the Doodle
boss confessed his guilt, but the fact
that he had once been so closely con-
nected with one of the sensational
events Of graft history had not caused
him to give the general subject
enough thought to form any opinions.
This was his declaration. and 1T was
TO overthrow it that Heney directed his
endeavors. The prosecuting attorney
got his first opening when Haber said
that he was opposed to the giving OF
Immunity to Ruef, and then coupled
this with a statement that he had no
opinion concerning Ruefs guilt
OPPOSED IMMUNITY
We'll. then, why are you against
giving immunity TO Ruef If you do not
believe him guilty?" asked Heney.
1T establishes a bad precedent" as
serted Haber. Such men might con-
fess and lie about it afterward to
throw their own crimes on some one
else"
Have you heard of any bribery go
ing on since the present exposures were
made?' asked Heney.
Wait a minute, Mr.. Juror" inter
rupted A. A Moore. I object to that.
COIlLuOn With 6ANoN many ONASA
assertions coming from Mr.. Heney, it
assumes that there was bribery all
along the line. No one connected with
the gas, the telephone or the Parkside
matter has been convicted"
Give us time. We can't try them
all at once, you know, but We'll get
around to them" answered Heney.
And better late than never. as un-
der Mr. Byingtons administration"
added O'Gara. glancing in the direction
of the former district attorney, now at
tached to Calhoun's staff.
Mr.. Byington's results were better
than Mr.. O'Gara's can ever hope to be-"
returned Byington with becoming mod
esty. His record speaks for itself"
Yes, they were all poor men-poor
devils without any money or any
COURT STOPS CLASH
Judge Lawlor directed the examina-
tion into a new channel and Heney
went after Haber on a statement of
the latter that he was sick of reading
OF the graft cases" In answer to BY
ington's remark that Calhoun had not
been brought to trial until after a year
and a half of insistent demand, Heney
answered that the demands had not
begun until every teehnicality had
been exhausted, and that, moreover, 1t
was impossible to try more than two
cases at once. This started another
war of words, in which every attorney
in the room took part Judge Lawlor
stopped it finally by ordering that the
counter charges and recriminations
which were being banded about so
freely must cease
With all due respect to the court
the talesman suggested, these DELAYS
and technicalities make 1t almost i'm
possible TO get good men to sit on
jury and leave their families and their
businesses"
Then" inquired Heney, because a
defendant hires shrewd ATTORNEYS to
delay proceedings by every possible
means, would you have the district at
torney make a cowardly surrender of
the prosecution?
An answer was prevented by objec-
ions which were sustained.
There were dozen other exchanges
between counsel before the challenge
interposed by the prosecution was
finally submitted and allowed by the
court.
Another contest was brewing when
adjournment was taken last night
Charles n. Heidewald, proprietor of a
restaurant opposite the offices of the
United Railroads in Oak street, was
passed by the defense After the tales
---~e-- ~-~~N
dice or opinion concerning the merits
of the last car strike Heney brought
out the fact that he had been a mem
Der of the carmen's union until that
time and had been expelled and threat
ened by the union with boycott be-
cause his place was patronized by
strike breakers in the employ of the
United Railroads.
TALESMAN CONTRADICTORY
At first the talesman denied absolutely
that he had any knowledge of strike
breakers eating in his restaurant: then
he contradicted himself fatty when
cornered- He was caught by Heney in
a number of glaring contradictions of
testimony and 1t became apparent that
he was using every effort to remain in
the jury box The examination was
not concluded but Heney indicated that
he will not give 1t up this morning
until the talesman is disqualified.
Other talesmen who were. examined
yesterday and excused on the ground
II. -.