The San Francisco call., 1910-05-13

with him, and it was just before court
reconvened that Boyd and Taylor met
him.
Despite Wards assertion that he had
talked nothing but insurance business
to any of the men he had been with,
the county officials warned him that he
had been indiscreet in his actions and
suggested that he keep away from the
jurors and the courthouse until the
trial was over. Ward said that he had
intended TO take the next train to San
Francisco, and left San Rafael imme-
diately afterward.
A brief sensation developed just be
fore the conclusion of the examination
of jurors in the Afternoon. District At
tOrney Boyd had exhausted the five per-
emptory challenges allowed him under
the statute. and had made an unsuc
cessfuFeffort to disqualify Joseph Mar
tineZ, a San Rafael saloonman. through
challenge for cause. Failing in his
challenge he had allowed Martinez 10
be sworn, but returned to the attack
shortly afterward with a request that
the court reopen the examination Of the
Juror.
Judge Lennon granted Boyds re-
quest over the objection Of the defense,
and the district attorney drew from the
juror a repetition of a former state
ment that he had not discussed the
case with any one. Boyd then called
Howard Mcclellan. a San Francisco
newspaperman, who took the stand as
a witness and declared that he had
talked about the case with Martinez
and that the latter had told him he did
not believe Flannery could ever be con-
victed.
MEMORY FAILS VENIREMAN
Martinez said he did not remember
the conversation referred to, but ad
mitted that Flannery had come into his
saloon since being indicted and had
been introduced to him by Attorney Z.
B. Martinelli. a member of Flannery's
counsel. Judge Lennon himself ques-
toned Martinez, while Attorney George
A knight cross questioned Mcclellan.
One of the questions he asked of the
witness was whether he himself be-
lieved they would ever convict Flan-
nery" The sally was objected to by
Boyd, but caused laugh in the court
room, that brought a sharp reprimand
from the court.
IF such a demonstration occurs
again." announced Judge Lennon, Il
will have the courtroom cleared. This
is court of justice; not a vaudeville
show. Your question was highly i'm
proper, Mr.. Knight
Il apologize" answered knight.
Your apology is due responded the
court Don't do it again"
tinez was allowed and he left the box,
in which there was then but one other
vacant The two places were filed,
however. within less than an hour. after
three talesmen had been passed for
cause. and the defense had exercised
peremptory challenge against one of
them
At the outset of the morning session
the cases of TaIesmen c. c. Olmsted and
Morris Blumenthal, both of whom were
challenged for cause Wednesday after
noon, were settled. Olmsted was chal-
lenged by the defense on the ground
that he held an opinion concerning the
guilt of Frank MacSherry, the pool
room man who pleaded guilty to
charge similar to that pending against
Flannery, while the prosecutions chal-
lenge of Blumenthal was on an almost
identical ground. The court excused
both jurors and established the rule
that an admission by any talesman of
a positive opinion relating TO the Mac
Sherry case would be considered suf-
hcient cause for dismissal
The defense exhausted eight of it's 10
peremptory challenges before the jury
was completed. Robert Wood, who will
be the first witness. was sworn before
adjournment was taken and will be
questioned when the court reconvenes
at 10 o'clock this morning.