Newspaper Page Text
2 # INVOLVED IN I IEOAL SUITS Starbuck of Oakland Says f: Fled to Escape :v:• "; . Prosecution #tibrney for Kendalls Declares That They Had No Fear j of Proceedings ;£ero./idrove Cross to the Kendall place, were no signs of life at the rjancjfi .house, but the visitors thought that, the .Kendalls might bo off after \u2666took or. engaged' in some other part of their ranch. : Cross waited on the place VhlJe-G rider returned to town. Cross followed, at noon. : Other.m en who had appointments ?trlth Kendall went, to the place during the Tve.k'.and saw no one thereOn Mon :.«iayy. August J, Justice of the Peace •tTjrofppr' went to th« Kendall place and .investigated. He found the horse tied .iji the stable and food spoiling' in the 'lidusfV: He notified the authorities. yildvlie returned to Santa Rosa tonight, tut Smith -will stay here and with a :+ir)irer. posse will search the ranch to znorroty."' :. TJ>e. Kendalls had a second place in -the 'hills not far" from the property they Tiad: leased a^id the search will be car rifd -ihlo that locality. It is known that the family is not living there now. 'That ..fact has been determined. . !v»Tijle the baffling mystery of the absent Kendalls is perplexing Cazadero !*erry "little incident in the lives of the arjiejjfng" family is being recalled. Re cently Thomas Kendall had had some /svords \u25a0with William Churchman over a •3)l6*r •which Churchman had borrowed. This incident, the subject of gossip, is iiot given any consideration by Sheriff '.Smith' in. his investigation of the case. Kendall had leased his place from Mrs. 'Siarbuck on a three year contract. -Two years have passed and Kendall ii&jd .i;ust begun to make the place pay, Jtie #aid. The ranch is on the side hills : l>ord<ering on Austin creek. O'RbtBLE. WITH JAPA.\CSB \ Thomas Kendall and his father were \u25a0welt, thought of in this vicinity. The tether ; js about 55 years of age, the *on ti and the wife and mother 50. Pine* *&c. Kendalls took the Starbuck l^at e : ili«*s' have had trouble with Mrs. FtjsxbHck. The Japanese wood cutters liave b^en. conspicuous in their loyalty «b'tor£. Starbuck. One Japanese known aj&iTaina. was recently s^ea In an old cabin: belonging to the Kendalls with » dangerous looking knife in his hand. ;K*nflaji; had occasion to order off the place; some Japanese he thought were sftfng; : o-ti. his movements. ;j .AE?istJa.nt District Attorney Hoyle took the statements today of witnesses In this j.ease, • Among those whose state , jrnehts . were taken were: Mrs. F. D. Trp&piM:,. John Cox and F. D. Trosper. Mr?- . trooper, wife of the justice of the peace.. Is the- last pereon among" the wltriessps examined, to have seen Mrs. .Kendall. She said: "I.«m sure that Mrs. Kendall and her husband and son d>d riot leave their place voluntarily. Mrs! Kendall had been staying with me and left, on Saturday, July 23. She was to hove, returned on the following Mon \u25a0 As.fi but she did not. ijam Eure she would have, told me if she were going .away.. The Kendalls would -have to pass .our place if they went to Caza .derOi and. they <2i<* not." • JuC^e" Trosper expressed the ' same .opinion. Both Sheriff Smith and Hoyle ,4?.jcprej.sed their mystification over the •c-as>". '-....; '\u25a0'\u25a0 '\u25a0[ "'\u25a0: t" A : s- yet, 1 * j^aid the sheriff, "we have : noising -upon which to base a state ' merit that a crime has been committed. But it does not look reasonable that thJ^iKendalls would have gone off of 'ttteirjowrt volition and left things In . syc'n shape." ;^ of Crime ) ./ NQAKLiAxb. Aug. 3. — Mrs«. Margaret ;..; -Stajrhupk, wife of H. F. Starbuck. an : -.architect, living at 116 Lake : . .;Etreet>.;©wns the ranch. She said: ;,,' .^'Thpmas • Kendall came with his ,-. father .and mother from the Blue .vy mountains of Kentucky. I was anxious ;i to- secure the services of a good man K \-vitfip could look after the ranch, and •\u25a0". ..acrepted his. application upon the . > lilgiiest • recommendations. I'prA VI did. riot lease the place to him. He : '-'\u25a0-'. 'V**?-. merely hired to supervise the -'•;: '.work of keeping up the ranch, and ,= uh.d^r.the terms of the contract was to a certain percentage of the \u25a0-..;; profit and Increase each year. I pur \u25a0 ".po^ed In the end to colonize the ranch ;\u25a0;;' subdivide it, and build homes which I . :.cpuld offer to people of moderate or . -/no. means to help them make a start -. -irt life. )' ". : .'fKondall agreed to the terms, and .• was to keep a detailed account of the : v.wprk on the ranch, its receipts, dls • :..fiursement£. increase and profits. When ' . he; took charge, his mother and father '. acjcompanied him to the place, and the • / three lived together. " SHOOTING nKSUI/TS .'. . r.'Trouble started soon afterward, and ..-.since then I have had no end of dtffl : .-.-cu-rtyin relation to the property. Ken . flail, became involved in shady cattle :'; -deals first, which started a feud be .-: tween himself and two ranchers near ".. !br. •tv'llliam Hopper and John Collins -Daring the entanglement. Kendall re - .IPeatftdly threatened the lives of nelgh •..: boring ranch owners. His enmity to r \ -ward Collins was the greatest, and re :r: r . gentry. resulted -in a shooting- affair. In .•:...Trhich- 'Kendall's father barely escaped ;*Ke'rijaail stole hundreds of head of II; Advertising Talks .'*/!"•'"'. *> Faith, understanding and enthusiasm, necessary as they ' ifffM a^ C * n vs *, ness » < can not of themselves tiring success. : uJlirl\o§k V° U must create faith in others, impart your under- • y^^i stan °"" 1 8 to others, imbue others with your enthusiasm ; .- ' /J^ijl— • before you can sell a dollar's. worth of goods. ;>.'\u25a0/ • Talk to everybody every day in the paper that everybody reads. Tell the people what you have that is worth their consideration; talk quality and service; put your faith, understanding and enthusiasm in your \u25a0advertising. . . ' • • You will win. the confidence of your public, you will build up a business.you will make friends and followers of your customers. We are increasing the circulation of The Call at the' rate of thou- sands a month, we are- making thousands of new friends every day by following the advice we give you.^ we have what the people "want, and Xpc let them £non> what ivc have \u25a0 - ':i ,- \u25a0"\u25a0\u25a0'. -. Mr. Merchant, we want to take you along with : us -to a ; bigger .success. Through our advertising columns you can reach 1 50,000 readers non\ with an average of 2,000 nen> readers a jnohtK. We can give, you 'advertising copy and illustrations that will make your advertising space more profitable. I Phone Kearny 86 and ask our advertising manager about it: - . LAWLOR'S STATEMENT STARTS UPROAR CALHOUN CASE IS RESET FOR AUGUST 29 .: * ; ' — i^^^ ' The following is the statement made -from the. bench by Judge Lavvlor, in which he denied the motion of Patrick jCalhdun to dismiss the indictments against him and the reading, of which started the -uproar; in the court: V *- .7. 7 . , . . . On April 25. 1910. an application was made by Patrick Calhoun, Tirey L. Ford, Thornwell Mullally and Wil liam M. Abbott to dismiss the indict ments against them. The applica tion is before the court at this time for consideration. When the defendants pleaded not guilty they exercised their statutory right and each demanded severance from each other and from their co defendants. Abraham Ruef and Eu gene E. Schmitz. (Section 109&r Penal Code.)> There have been-five trials — three of Tirey L. Ford and one each of Abraham Ruef and Pat rick Calhoun. The second trial of Patrick Cal houn was commenced on July ,19, 1909 (case No. 1437). Owing to the illness of one of his counsel the trial was suspended on August 16, 1909. and resumed on September 30. 1909. On the following day the trial was ordered continued until November 15. 1909. on motion of the defendant, upon the ground of the pendency of a municipal campaign. ' On January S, 1910, Mr. Charles M. Fickert assumed the office of dis trict attorney. On February 7. 1910, the district attorney moved the court*to dismiss the remaining charges against these defendants (section 1385, Penal Code), which motion was by the court ordered denied. (Section 7, article 1. and section 19, article 6, of the constitutions -sections' 1041. 1042, 112 G. 1385, 1386 and 1387, Penal Code.) On February 14, 1910. the parties announced that they, were ready to resume the trial In case No. 1437 against Patrick - Calhoun, but the court continued the . case for" trial until February 17, 1010. On the last named day the cause was ordered continued for trial until April 25, 1910. On April 25. 1910, the four defend ants interposed a motion to dismiss the remaining indictments against them. The further hearing of the motion was continued until July 29. 1910. On the latter day the causes were continued until thjs time. Two things are chleflv responsible for the court's action in respect to the remaining indictments since the district attorney moved to dismiss them on February 7, 1910. First, the court's apprehensions based on the declared attitude of the said district attorney toward the remaining In dictments, and, second, the absence from the state of James L.. Galla gher, a material and indispensable witness in the said causes. The second reason will now be consid ered. It was the theory of the people in the five trials referred to that Abra ham Ruef represented the defend ants in the alleged bribery of the members of the board of super visors, and that James L. Galla gher, one of its members. In turn represented Abraham Ruef in the transactions. In this way the court is able to determine that the testi mony of this witness is material, and now holds, as a matter of law, that unless additional testimony Is pjroduced. it is Indispensable to the establishment of the res gestae. In the early part of December, IPO9. it became known that the wit ness had departed from the state. Up to the present time it has not been shown whether he had been formally subpenaed or was other wise under the authority of the court to appear as a witness in the trials of the remaining indictments. If he is subject to the authority of the court in any of those cases his absence would constitute a criminal contempt, and he could be extra dited from any other state having provisions of law similar to those of this state. (Sub. 4, section 166, and section 1548, Penal Code.) ; In this . connection it -may be proper to point out that practically ever since issue was joined on these indictments they have been on. the calendar for trial, and that during the trials referred to the cases not actually on trial were from time to time called and the witnesses ad monished by the court to appear on the deferred date. But it has not been ascertained whether in this manner the missing witness has been so admonished to appear so far as the remaining indictments are concerned. In the month of January, 1910, the court directed that all persons who could give testimony concerning the absence of the witness be subpe naed. On January 24, 1910. the first hearing was had and on several oc casions thereafter witnesses have been orally examined on the subject. From this oral testimony it is dif ficult to determine the intentions of the witness concerning his departure from and his return to the state. It seems that in the latter part of No. vember. 1909. he left for Europe, accompanied by his wife. Robert F. Gallagher, a brother of the witness, testified in effect that the witness never stated he Intended to absent himself as a witness in the graft cases and made no suggestion of that nature; that he. Robert F. Gal lagher, gained no such impression from anything he did say, except that that it was a disagreeable sit uation for him to be a witness, and that their talk proceeded along the line that there was not going to be the choicest cattle and blooded horses, selling them as his personal property. He kept no accounts and permitted the stock to fall off. He even, killed some of the best stock and shipped it away, pocketing the proceeds. Aside from using the money brought in from the ranch, he misappropriated my own funds for his own purposes and I lost a great amount of money. SUSPICIONS AROUSED "This was unknown to me for. some time, but my suspicion was naturally aroused, and I started an investigation which brought startling revelations. "I was determined to place him in the penitentiary for his offenses, and brought a lawsuit against him. I do not believe the rumor that he has been murdered. I know that feeling • ran high against. him, but I do not think that the ranch owners in the vicinity woulfl go to such violence. I am con vinced that his disappearance, has been caused by the criminal charge I have fHEySAisr FRANCISCO - CALL, THURSDAY, 4V4 V 191Q- any future trial in the graft prose- cutions. This brother testified fur ther: . ' _- *- " / "He did, state < on one> occasion .something 1 to the effect that Burns v had disappeared and that -Heney. had disappeared and that- there^wasn't any *prosecution; that^the incoming district-attorney would not certainly bein.earnest in the prosecutioru".v; ' Other witnesses -testified to a" vs-' riety of facts touching the departure of ;the witness from ; San- Francisco and hjs declarations on thevgeneral subject.: Pr.. : Alexander, Warner., gave testimony to the effect that he went" to Europe on an Atlantic, steamer with the witness and his wife, fj Thomas J. Gallagher.'a"nother brother, among other things quoted the witness to the effect that he was going to Europe; that he might set tle.in an eastern state; that he made no secret of his purpose, and that William J. Burns, special agent of the former administration in the district attorneys office, knew of his intention to leave. Nothing defi nite appears in the oral, showing concerning his intentions on 'the' JUDGE WILLIAM P. LA WLOR subject of his return, and so far as that showing Is concerned the point is more or less involved in conjecture. But on July 29, 1910. Frederick L. Berry, the assistant district attorney assigned to this department of the court, filed an affidavit embodying clippings from the local newspapers of the previous month, which state that the wit ness was. at the time the articles were written, in Vancouver. B. C From these clippings it appears that the witness intended to permanently locate in Vancouver. The only tangible evidence from the witness himself,, however, is found in his letter to Thomas J. Gallagher under date of June 29. 1910. in which this excerpt appears: "In reply to your inquiry I can not state when I shall return to San Francisco, If at all. I may remain here." . • In ray judgment a review of the showing up to this time leads to the inference that the witness left this jurisdiction and- Is remaining away , because of some form of un derstanding or agreement. The cir cumstances under which he left California clearly show that he was acting guardedly, notwithstanding the testimony, which there Is no reason to doubt, that he informed .several persons of his intention to take a trip. When the quoted state ment of Robert F. Gallagher was first made T was disposed to assume that the witness left the state prin cipally, because he believed the prosecution was at ah. end and that he made hie plans quietly no that the step would not occasion comment. In other words, that he did not be-, lieve there would be any further at tempt to prosecute the so called graft cases. But from a study of the entire'showing I can not adhere to that theory. I repeat that up to the time his presence was discovered In Vancouver the showing was un certain as to whether he really in tended to return to California, and, if so. when he would return. It was. to be seen that the action of the court would It>e influenced by tlils uncertainty, so when the exigencies of the situation called for a definite showing as to the witness" inten tions he seems to suddenly appear in Vancouver, .where, under the treaty conditions, .He would be, safe from extradition, and is promptly discovered by the reporter of a New York paper. In the clippings his quoted statements on the subject of his intentions are unequivocal. He is to make his home in Vancou ver. But his .personal communica tion to Thomas J. Gallagher, -al ready referred to, which he probably realized would be : produced in court, is significant in tenor and he is apparently less certain of his-In tentions. This would tend. to make his future action consistent should he hereafter return to California. From the entire showing I do not entertain any serious doubt as to what his real purpose is. I am in clined to believe that when the ne cessity for his presence as a witness has passed he will return. To en tertain any other view or be in se rious doubt on the point is to ignore brought against him, v and to escape which he.has fled the country, in com pany,with his mother, and father. I have had to engage five lawyers in order to oust the man." Fugitives, Lawyers Say BERKELEY. Aug. , 3.— That Tom Kendall, his father, Enoch, and mother, Ura' Kendall, disappeared ' from their 'home near Cazadero to -'a Void prosecu tion on a criminal charge, of appro priating for their own, use the,prop erty own id by Mrs. Margaret E. Star buck of Oakland, is the declaration of Attorneys H. W. Brunk, William O. Miner and R. M. F. \u25a0 Soto, who ; have been retained to have' the Kendalls ejected from the 1,000 v acr«r ranch. According to Brunk' the 'disappear ance of the; Kendalls; cannot be ex plained in any other way, in view of the fact that two suits, one to . ejict them from the ranch which they' are alleged to occupy unlawfully and J the other to prevent theni: selling property belonging to Mrs., Starbuck, ara on tneeve of trial in Santa, Rosa. The Kendalls, according, to. Brunk, were introduced jjto • .Mrs. \u0084 Starbuck about a year ago and" shortly after ward occupied the big ranch. "A'sult was' begun] last . August to ejict the Kendalls. from the property, of which I know nothing," said Brunk todaj'. "We commenced two suits- for Mrs. Starbuck ; and filed them June ' 7 of this year to eject the Kendalls from the' land and replevin the stock that Tom Kendall is alleged to have? sold and to enjoin him", from disposing of other property. / " Mrs. Starbuck Defeated [Special Dispatch, to .'The Call] ; SANTA, ROSA, .Aug..'. 3.— Mrs. Mar garets Starbuck ; has had considerable litigation: with / Mr.> and : Mrs. :; Enoch Kendall and; their son;- Thomas A.'Ken dall.isince; they - leased,- her -i property nearly two" years agor but in it:all she has been defeated.' r ; • '~ , , • About a : year after the I Kenda 11s had taken -the lease Mrs. J Starbuck declared that I they had j violated 'its ;;terms arid sued .them to; enforce Hhe ' lease," : but- In this was r defeated, the /court holding that- there, had been no -violation of its terrns.^; ; *r'\i. .' .»•\u25a0...-.-\u25a0... '\u25a0\u25a0.•.;.; Recently, she ", filed ;a;suit for injunc tion seeking, to restrain, the' Kendalls from selling the; livestock bn'the place and a- Second, suit- was" filed; In 'an effort to \u25a0 eject .them . f roni jthe^property," ' Mrs. Starbuck.. claimlng'Hhat^they held it without, a*- lease., : The;; injunction^ was denied, and the ejectment 'suit is "still pending. •' r%&££S££B&s&*- r ''^'':'~- : ''- — — _ — _ _ — ; — _ _ — ___ .--\u2666 the '\u25a0'inherent probabilities of the .showing -and -to deny a fair consid eration to the known history of this litigation. Now it must follow that. lf the witness has left and is remaining .away from the state because of an arrangement of some nature affect ing these cases the responsibility for his absence should be placed where it belongs. On April 25, 1910,- the district attorney stated to the court: * * * And it appearing: also that James I>." Gallagher laft .with th« consent and con nivance of those -who had preceded me in office, I at this time do not wish to assume any responsibility . for his disappearance. Whether he shall return or not I 'can not say. Some of th« witnesses who were called here testified that he went away with the intent and with the purpose of embarrassing my administration and that he was sup posed to keep away until such time as cer tain persons would request his return. * • • The foregoing fairly states the position of the district attorney on this point, as repeatedly-expressed in court since he first moved the dis missal of these indictments. Tf the charge that the "former administra tion entered into a bargain with the witness to default be. true there would be no alternative but to dis miss the indictments without delay. But I have found.no evidence In the showing tending to support so grave a charge, and Upon sound reasoning it would : seem to; be opposed to cv.cry: reasonable 'probability. • Ac cording to the showing William J. Burns left .the- state abo_ut three •weeks ; in advance 'of : thV witness, 'and, so far as the eourt.'=is advised, he has not since been in the; state. That the former .administration may have distrusted* the official inten tions of the district attorney toward these indictments might be assumed -.from all the surrounding •..circum stances.But it does not seem prob able that the former administration would Induce a material and indis pensable witness to leave the state and thereby make it easy for the district attorney to secure a result which otherwise . might se rious embarrassment. So far as the showing 'Is concerned there is no tangible proof tending to support the charge of the district attorney, nor is there any proof which would Justify such an Inference. •< Nor, on the other hand, do I find any formal evidence in the showing which tends, to bring the responsi bility for the disappearance of the witness home to these defendants. In the absence of, tangible proof neither side should be charged with so grave an act. But if there has bsen. complicity on^he part of either of the parties every effort should be made before disposing of these cases. finally, to establish the facts. It has been pointed out that if the former administration entered Into a bargain .with : the witness looking to his absence the applica tion should be granted without de lay. And clearly, -if the defendants are responsible for the absence of the ivitness, under a* familiar maxim" of the law. the application -,- shoni i be. promptly denied. (Section 3517, Civil Code.) ,; \u25a0 ; There being no tangible proof, Wm H B jl^tw I (bb -I BBH fl^fl I B^^ |Bh \u25a0\u25a0 n bklm OOP I ' — Z^ESjbV I 831 f/> L^Sgg&£S?. Limited A Delicious Food for breakfast or lunch that.most everyone likes— % : distinctly and pleasingly different from the usual— r \u25a0 '\u25a0-- : -." ''<.--:\u25a0-' \u25a0 :~: ~ / ::\- -."~'.\ - • '. = •"• < ; Post Toasties are^ready ; to serve^ from the package with cream^" or^milk^^nfa^or with the . ' entire family and happijy solve "what to eat" : r in hot weather. • • v , Postum Cereal Co, ' Ltd , Battle Creek, 'Mich. ; . .* : ; therefore, .before-^ the court of the <> complicity/of the:partles,should: the ° pending application be J granted at ' ° thiaUlme?: \u25a0 :<\u25a0-;\u25a0 ... \u25a0. ' I A"~person /accused of crime fa?en titled to a speedy trial. (Section 13, o article 1, Constitution.) V " : V , - + SThls' fundamental right* has been <> made the subject of .; pro-- i vision: ;The second subdivision ,' of i section 1352 of the PenarCode pro- \u2666 vides that:? . :. * t \u25a0 Unless *'.' good ~- cause |to . the contrary \u25a0 Is J shown; the court must : order i the prosecution - T dismissed if. the: indictment ' is not brought \u25a0 ? to trial within 60 days after tho ,' ftliue \u2666 thereof. • ..„...',.\u25a0.\u25a0 f - \u25a0\u25a0*---. \u25a0' :.-- \u25a0\u25a0:\u25a0- ,; '-\u25a0*\u25a0\u25a0\u25a0\u25a0, -ivY „\u25a0 . :i; .•/ -• .More than 6p days have run in fa- J r<> vor of this application, and the ques- .> tion presented ;at this time is i whether the showing : touching the- f absence of James L. Gallagher shall ° constitute "gopd cause"' within the <\u2666 meaning of the law. This term must .° be construed and applied according *' to the, t peculiar, circumstances .of o each* "case. It should be interpreted o so that the, rights, of both parties o shall be: equally recognized. ' The * absence of a material and indlspen- i sable witness for. the people would, o under,, proper, circumstances, 'con-J^' stitute; a good cause,^provided that \u2666 good faith and diligence are shown ° inrthe effort to produce the witness. ° livrelßergerowdSS California, 349) is"; a leading authority. on this ques- o tion and is almost invariably cited \u0084 in support of applications of. this 4 character. It is proper to point out 4 that in the prevailing opinion the A court studiously^^ eliminates from the «. pertinency of the authority the ab- -^ sence'orillness of a witness for the " prosecution.^ . \u25a0- T .The conclusion I have, reached is 7 tHat under the law and the sur-' f rounding • circumstances, including ? the recent action., of - the witness, J . that another reasonable continuance x should be directed in order, if pos- 4 sible, that the duty of the court in <\u25ba the premises shall be rendered more <> ; clear. Afthls time the court is not <\u25ba ; satisfied that the relief sought [<> should be -On the . other ° hand it is realized that a final de- " cision should not much longer be * delayed. In the determination of I this matter the .court, . while fully I recognizing the rights of the de- I fendants, is mindful of ; the rights >' of the people and its- own sense of \u2666 responsibility and Is anxious to \u2666 avoid a decision which will serve as a mischievous precedent. \u25bc It is idle to attempt to Ignore the f inherent probabilities of -the situ- ? ation presented. A material and in- t dispensable witness is absent from T • - the state and the court is called o upon to intervene because the dis- <( trlct attorney has at practically <> every turn followed the lead of .<> these defendants, -Through the in- .<> fluence of Unusual agencies the law <> has broken down so far as thes« 4> cases are concerned. - The crimes""" charged are of the most serious na- "' ture, because such criminal activity ° tends to sap the very foundation of \u25a0]' government.. The statute of llmita- ;, tions has run against these charges, o and if the application is granted, .. therefore, there can be no further <> prosecution, no matter what devel- <> opments may follow. (Section 800, <• Penal Code.) In the trial of Patrick " Calhoun the court admitted evidence < h of a ,most extraordinary character " on the theory of the people that it ° .tended to show guilty consciousness " on the part of the accused. This ;,, evidence was not controverted. It o included the dynamiting of the home <( ..of the witness under, circumstances \u0084 1 which threatened not only his own" <« life, but also the lives of several <> other persons. A certain other <• building, the property of the wit- ° ness, was subsequently blown up " •by. the use of dynamite. •If the ap- T parent design .on the life of the wit- f ness had been successful the court, '<[ would bo less perplexed in deciding o a question of this character. It is A possible that these experiences, and \u0084 not the suggested arrangement with <> the witness are responsible for his <> absence. The evidence also Included ° an effort to suppress testimony by. t an attempt to induce, a witness to * .leave the- jurisdiction of the court <( and other matters of a' serious na- \u25a0 ° ture. . \u25a0 \u2666 And, finally, while the court is *' clear that it should not base any o - action at thjs time upon the as- .. sumption that either side is re- .<> sponslble for the absence of the wit- <> ness, yet reason and the exercise of <\u25ba a sound discretion dictate that the <\u25ba court should act* with prudence. [" Before the Indictments should be. f finally disposed of every reasonable <l effort should be made to get at the ° truth of, the situation. The disposi- ° tion of grave charges other than on o their merits is not to be encouraged 4 and should not be allowed, except In * the face of a strict legal necessity. \u25a0<. Let the cases be continued until 10 <\u25ba a. m., Monday, August 29, 1910. So <\u25ba ordered. \u2666 COURT REFUSES TO^ DISMISS CALHQUN Judge Forced to Leave Bench to I Silence Uproar Which Followed Decision Defendant Addresses Court De - spite Efforts of Lawlor to Keep Him Silent Continued From Pace 1. inducing-a "witness to leave the state, that was brought out In 'the trialof Calhoun, on the theory that it tended to show" guilty consciousness on the part of the defendant." "If your -honor please/ loudly de clared Stanley. Moore when the judge had concluded reading, "we insist upon our. right .* to reply to some of these Insinuations and remarks that your honor has made." , "I will suggest to counsel that he will -not reply, and that if he Is. dis posed 'S.o reply he will resort to the agencies of which. he has availed him self, so frequently during, the ex perience this court has. had," sharply replied the judge. '. .-"We assign that as the last word of your partisanship," returned Moore, and raising his voice to a shout he proceeded^ "We( insist on our right to reply. here in this forum In which you have made these charges and insinua tions. We intend to stand here until we -are .afforded the opportunity to reply, which Is our right and our due. and which any. court -with a speck of fairness and impartiality will freely accord us." • — . "You will take your seat," directed Judge Lawlor. "if you vlo not I will adjudge you guilty of ! contempt." Moore utterly disregarded the warn ing-. "I intend to stand here." he said, "as 1 have told your honor before, and reply freely and frankly to what your honor has just seen fit to say as a political document, and in the doing of politics from the bench that you stultify in your occupancy." SENTENCE PRONOUNCED i Then Judge Lawlor did what he has more, than once threatened to do to the Calhoun attorney. . "I adjudge you guilty of contempt." he said, "and as a punishment therefor it is hereby ordered that you be con fined in the county jail for the period of five days." Next A. A. Moore, who... is the father of Stanley Moore, placed himself in contempt. ; "I fully agree, your honor, that you are a partisan, a bitter partisan, and doing dirty politics, anJ have been before these indictments were ever filed in this court, as the events of that midnight deal in which you par ticipated', on April 29 amply demon strate." said A. A. Moore. . "The bailiff will take the counsel into custody," directed the judge. Then Stanley Moore displaced his father in -the spotlight. "Does -your honor refuse to permit any reply to those remarks you have made?" he asked. . "I adjudge A. A. Moore guilty of con tempt of court," said the judge, "and order as punishment that he.be con- 1 fined in the county jail for five days." "I 'have here." again interposed the persistent younger Moore, "the ballot that contains yo.ur honor's name and which contains the inspiration for these remarks you have made.'.* MOORE IX CUSTODY "Take the counsel Into custody, Mr. She'rlff," was. his honor's reply. The bailiff tapped Stanley Moore on the shoulder and led him away from the lawyers' table and Into the inner in closureof the court, where the. young attorney remained during the rest of the. proceedings. District Attorney Fickert was the next participant in \u25a0 the wrangle. He said: N "I desire to state my conclusions as to the absence of James L. Gallagher, and I request fhe court to accord me 'the right to reply to the aspersions that have been cast upon me from the bench." • \u25a0 Judge Lawlor said that when It be ca%ie necessary for him finally to de termine the court's attitude he would give the district attorney full oppor tunity to address the court. "Well, I desire to have that right at this time, if your honor please," re turned Fickert. "You have from time to time cast reflections upon me and my office for my attitude in this mat ter. You have now stated that I fol lowed the lead of these* defendants. I Continued on Pace 8, Column 1 Fairmont Hotel Beginning September 1, 1910. Table d'hote or American Plan dining: room Trill be conducted. In addit.'on to the European plan or a . la carte restaurant. . HOTEL BELMONT Sosnr. modern rooms, thoroughly clean. 50« day and np, $2.50 per wk. up; prlrat* batn. 13 per wk. np. 730 Eddy. ItaakUn 4200. Take Eddy car from ferry. . WHERE TO DINJ~[ FOUNTAIN BEERiAND;LUNCH;HALL Gore, . Corner / Mwrket, Kearny aad •~ Geary. Streets— Dovrnatalra •\u25a0" -.We give more for the money than any line of \u25a0 business In S. b '., and have done It for 14 years. ' . . ' Jndse for Yourself. \u25a0 . -Tour.-cholce of one of thc'follow- Ingr i dishes, -with i a of wine. steam : or lager, beer, buttermilk or a cigar, for sc. ..-: Portion . of ; crab served wtth two sc ; purchases. . • -\u0084 \u25a0 Chill con Cam* " Crtbi " Mexican Beans Clam Jo!e« ,-.; Cltm Chowder t B «ef SteW* . .Corned Beef Hasb Kcast Beef" ' ,-. Steamed Clams ; ; - - \> \u25a0\u25a0 Uotton Stew " 9«. m. «o2p, jn. ;*;; Parcels : checked --.free for? pntroaa.'v MUSIC — GENTLEMEN i OXfcY. LIFEBOATS WILL BE TESTED AT SEA Ingersoll Craft Must Go Through Exacting Maneuvers Out side the Heads Army Officers Will Determine Vessel's Suitability for Ala > \ ririe Emergencies . Tests will be made today of the Ingersoll lifeboats outside the heads under' the direction of Major H. P. Young, depot quartermaster. • Accom panied by Major Scott and Captain Grant, assistants to the depot quarter master, and other officers of the army and navy. Major ToungwDl leave thla morning in the transport Buford fr»» several hours* experiments with the boats. Among the tests to be made arejts suitability for picking up men at sea an'J for abandoning ship in case of disaster or fire. Landing through the surf will be tried also, provided: the sea Is rough enough to make it. a reasonable test. Colonel W. A. Shunk, First cavalry, who has been : ordered frotn tho Presidio to "Walla Walla., will leave In a few days for his new post- Major Joseph A.x Gaston will be in command . of the cavalry troops at this post. Major Thomas B. Lamoreux. ; coast artillery corps, commanding Fort Miley, has been granted two months* sick leave. The maneuver board, consisting of Major Wright. Captain Bjornstad and. Captain Brees, wtilch convened Mon 'JayVat army headquarters' tn this city, will leave in a day or two for Atasca dero. to carry on Its work of formulat ing problems for the coming man euvers tn^re. :v: v .^" ':Ts '"\u25a0'>;\u25a0\u25a0 Lieutenant Edward D. Kremers, medical corps. Presidio of San Fran cisco, will proceed today to. Fort Miley for temporary duty "pending the as signment of a regular medical officer. TRIES TO TRICK JUDGE — Because he swore falsely by raisins his Wt hand Instead of hi* right, Harry Kalpas. alias Anstidon. a waiter, charged with stealing a reToWer from O. U> renzc*. 154^ Polk street, was conricted bx Po lice Jndgi* Con I.i n yesterday and sentenced to sis months In the county jail. .^ . A'jjMs Concord—with Ars-Sotch iHrW Evanston— with Buttonhola • " *" m THE NEW Arrow COLLARS FOR SUMMER. Hish •aoora for looir- * lew enoach for comfort and plenty of room for the ti« ta .lid* in. '->*> -: i',; isc.eacn,atorts<!. Clnett. Peabody <k Company Arrow Cn?s. He tL U W RATES to ail. • EASTERN CITIES During the Summer Months, with < Stop-over privileges *' J" CANADIAN PACIFIC Six Hnsdrsd Miles of Unsurpassed Scensrj tftroush tie Canadian Rock} Moantaias] Call or write for Rates and Informatlori E. E.'PENN : General Agent. Passcngsr Dcfartmcnt 645 Marktt Strut (Palact Hottl Bulldlifl) SAN FRAXCISCO HOTEL COLONIAL Stockton Street Asorc Sutter •' San Francisco Americas Flan, 13.00 Day European Plan, I^o Day A botel wtth erery modern coaTealeaee. Ererj room connectlns bata. "*"• HOTEL TURPIN Newest and Most Popular Commercial Hotel. IT-1» Powell St. at Market Six atorles or «olld comfort: 10 Brat cl*«s «at> lna; bouses wttWa 1 block. Bates. $1. $1.50 toM P«r £*j; 223 roouij; not a dark roosi la tSm r. t. and A. W. TmtPtS. Praps, and Mess, Former Owner* Royal and Hamilton Hotels. . TRY OUR Special 40c Luncheon ODEON CAFE MAHKETIjTD EDDY STREETS • Music Every Evening I'". • ' - : " - r: \u25a0\u25a0- \u25a0 Want to Loan Money? JUOTCAIiL^^TADS ;