The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, July 26, 1895, Page 14

14 THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, FRIDAY, JULY 26, 1895. ; SO G G0 LS & B s D ne i o e Ve R e Al b S it i M i it il O i i e e i s G G N S RS e B DURRANT 15 DENIED A CHANGE OF VENUE Judge Murphy Gives His Reasons for the Decision. GOLDENSON CASE CITED. His Honor Makes Some Very Plain Statements About That Play. WILL STOP ITS PRODUCTION. The Prisoner Wore a Carnation in His Buttonhole and Took Things Easlly. Readers of THE CaLy will with satisfac- tion note the fact that no space will be wasted in these columns in reporting the proceedings of this case. A clear, conser- vative, concise, succinct account of the trial of Durrant will be given. Complete stenographic notes of the proceedings will be taken. These notes will be intelligently edited, condensed and arranged in such a manner that a comprehensive understand- ing of the case may be obtained by the reader without wading through useless columns of uninteresting and tiresome de- tails. Too much prominence has already been given to certain prurient phases that have been unnecessarily magnified in this remarkable case. In these columns all such objectionable features will be subordinated; will, in fact, be elim- inated to the greatest possible degree. The story of the crime will lose none of its tragic interest by the omission of the ob- jectionable features that could be easily pressed to the attention of the public. In fact the natural human interest will pe in- creased rather than diminished by rele- gating to the background unpleasant theo- ries that have occupied the minds of some of the detectives and a few newspaper cor- respondents ever since the date of the double murder in Emmanuel Church. William Henry Theodore Durrant was placed on trial for his life yesterday for the Emmanuel Church murders. Judge Murphy denied his application for a change of venue, and as a consequence the community which was horrified at the brutal butcheries of Blanche Lamont and Minnie Williams will bear the expense of the trial of the man accused of the crimes. The decision of Judge Murphy on the application was not wholly unexpected. In fact, it is just barely possible that the attorneys for the defense would have been as much surprised as anybody else had the application been granted. In the cele- brated Goldenson murder case a similar motion, even more strongly backed than the one presented by Durrant’s attorneys, was denied by Judge Murphy some .years ago, his position being sustained later by the Supreme Court. Remembering this and knowing the confidence with which the District Attorney had announced that he was prepared to resist the Durrant ap- plication, the people came to the conclu- sion that the rule established in the Goldenson case would be carried out. The attorneys for the defense, of course, had nothing to say in the matter, butit is safe to conjecture that they were aware of Judge Murphy's action in the former mat- ter and had merely made the application to save what rights they might have in the matter. If, however, the defense ever really de- sired the change of venue, there is just one ray of hope for them vet. In denying the application his Honor stated that if later they believed there existed the neces- sity for a change in the place of trial he would grant them leave to renew the ap- plication. The general impression that the change of venue would not be granted and that the trial would proceed at once drew out an extra large number of persons, and shortly after 9 o’clock the corridors around Department 3 of the Superior Court were crowded with the curious. They wanted just that one fleeting glimpse of the pris- oner, which they knew they could get as he was whisked up the stairs and across the hall to the courtroom, even if they were not permitted to occupy seats in the tribunal at the inception of the trial. The patience of the watchers was taxed to the limit, however, as Chief Jailer Sattler failed to put in an appearance with his charge until about five minutes before the hour for the convening of court, and pris- oner and custodian passed through the darkened passageways so quickly that the door had closed behind them almost ere the throng was aware that the object of their morbid curiosity had come and gone. Promptly at 10 o’clock Judge Murphy took his seat on the bench and called the case of the People vs. W. H. T. Durrant, Counsel for both sides answered ready and the day’s proceedings were begun. The prisoner sat at his ease bet.weenzhis father and Jailer Sattler, looking the ene in the courtroom least interested in what was about to take place. Over in the jury-box Captain Lees was in earnest conversation with young Mr. Lynch, the very clerical- looking secretary of the Rev. J. George Gibson of Emmanuel Baptist Church. Facing the bench sat the detective-in-chief for the defense, Harry N. Morse, in close conversation with Messrs. Dickinson and Deuprey. The courtroom was filled to overflowing with the citizens who Lad been summoned on the jury panel and a favored few who had been enabled to gain admit- tance by virtue of passes issued by Sheriff ‘Whelan. Among these were half a dozen ladies, drawn thither by that excusable curiosity which demands a sight of the celebrated, criminal or otherwise, with which the masculine element seems to be as largely tinctured as the feminine. TUpon the announcement of counsel that they were ready Judgze Murphy went directly to business. “Proceed, Mr. District Attorney,” he said. “I have to present to your Honor,” said Mr. Barnes, rising, a package of papers in his hands, ‘‘certain affidavits in o%poeifion to the defendant’s motion for a change of venue already made.” He then proceeded to unroll the papers and read the affidavit of Edward Mills, as follows: Iam an adult eifizen of the State of Califor- nia, by occupation merchant, and reside at 518 Fell street, in_this City and County, and am competent to give testimony herein. 1 believe that while there is considerable public interest in this case, I believe that there is no prejudice now existing in the minds of the calzem of the City and County, which would jeopardize orinjure the rights of the defendant herein, or which would prevent him from having a per- factly fair and impartial trial in this City and County for the trial of the offense with which he is charged. I have conversed with citizens of San Fran- cisco, who are liable to and qualified for jury duty in this City and County, and they have, and each of them has, expressed to me that he has no prejudice against the defendant herein, and that if called upon as a juror he could give the defendant a fair and impartial trial upon the law and evidence, and that he believes that the defendant could have a perfectly fair and impartial trial in this City and County, end can also have all the rights which the law ac- cords him. The District Attorney stated that he had affiqavits in exactly similar language from A. S. Baldwin, real estate agent, who re- sides at 2231 Washington street; D. W. Hitcheock, general agent of the Union Pa- cific Railroad Company, 1 Montgomery street; Thomas B. Sullivan, reporter, 1412 Sacramento street; Arthur H. Barendt, reporter, 813 Pine street; Thomas E. At- kinson, 304 Stockton street; M. C. Allen, reporter, 8131 Capp street; Ernest Brand, banker, 1924 Broadway; G. H. Luchsinger, banker, 316 Scott street; Lippman_Sachs, merchant, 820 Post street; Samuel Rosner, 1607 Bush street; Leopold S. Bachman, 2323 Devisadero street. The aflidavit of Captain I. W. Lees was then read. Itisas follows: I. W. Lees, being duly sworn, deposes ana says: Iam now and for many years last past have been captain of detectives of the regular dignation of the community of the City and County of San Francisco, but I deny that such indignation is directed against this defendant as an individual, but is directed against the offense itself, as’ 1t would be in_any other de- cent and law-abiding community. Ideny that a dis] ionate investigation of "this casé can- not be had, but on the contrary, Iam in- jormed, and "I believe and therefore state the fact to be, that there is nothing to my knowl- edge in the public. mind or in the press 10 ne- cessitate a change of the place of trial of this offense in order that the defendant herein ma; obtain and have a just, fair and impartia trial; but on the other hand,Iam informed, and believe, and therefore state the fact to be, that the defendant can and will obtain a per- tectly fair and impartial trial within the City and County of San Francisco, State of Califor- nia. Iadmit that on Monday, the 22d day of July, 1895, the Examiner published an article, together with the headlines thereof, entitle “Durrant in the Dock To-day,” attached to the second afidavit of W. H. T. Durrant, subscribed and sworn to by said Durrant upon the 22d day of July, and filed in support of his mo- tion for & change of venue, and I admit that on the 21st day of July the San Francisco Chronicle published an article entitled, “For Murdering Two Girls—Durrant’s Trial to Be- gin To-Morrow,” said article being attached to above-mentioned afiidavit of said Durrant. I am, however, informed and believe and state the fact to be, that said articles and each of | them are not calculated to, nor will they, in- fluence the minds of the public so thata fair and impertial trial of said Durrant cannot be had in said City and County; and upon the other hand I am informed and believe, and therefore state the fact to be, that notwith- standing said articles that haveappeared in the past or that may appear in the future, that the people of the City and County of San Francisco | can give said defendant Durrant a perfectly fair and impertial trial within the confines of their own City and County: I further state that during all the time while said Durrant was in custody of the Chief of Police, from the time of his arrest in Contra Costa County, until aiter case was to be called for trial. The publi- cation of such matter simply tends to arouse a state of feeling against_the party accused, to disturb the public mind and to make it extremely difficult to get jurors in the proper frame of mind to try such a case as the one at bar. But, I cannot con- ceive that even the publication of such articles would have such an effect asto disturb the minds of as large a number of citizens who are capable of performing jury duty as is claimea on the part of the defendant, 5 ““There is another matter which I desire to call to the attention of the counsel on both sides, and that is regarding the threatened production of this so-called })lay. I would say now that the court, as ar as it is concerned, will not permit the production of any such play in this City during this trial, or while the action is going on in this department, if this court can prevent it. No men or ‘mdy of men have the right to produce such a play as set forth in the affidavits of the defendant, and thereby affect the judgment of citizens by its production. It would be an outrage on decency, it would be a violation of the fundamental principles of law, and it would be an outrage on the rights of this defendant to produce_any such exhibition or play, or Wgutever it may be called. If the prtx'luction of sucha play is threatened, it would be the duty of counsel on both sides to call the attention of the court to it, and the court will take such means and use such powers as it has to prevent the production and to punish the persons at- tempting to produce it. “I will now say that, under the well- established practice of law and in view of the facts in this case, for the time being police force of the City and County of San Fran- cisco, State aforesaid. 1 have been present in the courtroom of the Superior Court of the City ana County of San Francisco, Department 3 thereof, on’the 22d day of July, A. D. 1895, and have heard read the afiidavits of William Henry Theodore Dur- rant, C. J. Geinger and P. J. Perkins on the motion fora change of venue made by the de- fendant in the case of the People of the State of California ys. W. H. T. Durrant, charged with the murder of Blanche Lamont. Iadmit that the Evening Post, the Daily Re- ort, the Evening Bulletin, the Examiner, the an Francisco Chronicle and THE CALL are newspapers of a general circulation, published daily within the City and County of San Fran- cisco, and that these papers were and each of them so_printed, published and distributed from the 1st day of July, 1895, until the date of this afidayit. I further admit that in such newspapers hereinbefore mentioned, and dur- ing the month of April, 1895, the several arti- cles which are attached to the affidavit of said W. H. T. Durrent, subscribed and sworn to on the 22d ot July and filed in this court in sup- port of his motion for a change of venue, were ublished by said newspapers in the manner oliowing; that is to say, in_the issues of the Evening Post of April15,1895; April 16,1895; April 17, 1895; April 19, 1895; April 20, 1895, and the issues of the Daily Report of April 15, 1895; April 19, 1895; April 20, 1895, and in the issues of the Chronicle of April 15, 1895; April 16, 1895; April 17, 1895; April 18,1895; April 19, 1895; April 20, 1895, and in the issue of the Examiner of April 16,1895 April 17,1895; April 18, 1895; April 20, 1895, and | in’ the issue of the Evening Bulletin of April | 15.1895; April 16, 1895, and April 19, 1895. | I deny that from the newspaper articles, together with the head-lines thereof, which | are set forth in the aforesaid aflidavit of Dur- | rant, or by any other means known to me, that | the minds of the citizens of this City and | County are now inflamed against the defend- | herein, and I deny that there is any | prejudice or bias against the defendant herein, whether on the part of the public or the press of said Uity and County, and I deny that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had of the action now pending against the defendant in said City and County, State aforesaid; but, upon | the other hand, I am informed and believe, | and, therefore, state the fact to be, that the | deiendant herein was arrested for ‘the crime | upon which he is now sought to be brought to | trial on the 14th day of April, 1895; that the | newspaper publications of which defendant | Compiains, and upon which he in part bases | his application for a change of venue in this | case, were published from the 15th to the 20th | days of April, 1895, inclusive; thatthelastone | of ‘said articles, which appears in and is at- | tached to the first affidavit subscribed to and | filed by defendant upon this application, bears | the date of April 20, 1895, and since the pub- lication of said article last mentioned ninety- | four_days have elapsed; that by reason of | this long period of time, I am informed and | believe, and therefore state the fact to be, that | such excitement as may have existed in the public minds at the time of these murders and at the time of the errest of the defendant herein has altogether subsided; that there isa deeg interest taken in this case by the citizens | of this City and County of San Francisco, but that said interest is in no way biased or Prein diced against the defendant “herein, and that | the present condition of the public mind is such that the defendant can have a ger{ecuy fair and impartial trial within the City and County of San Francisco, and have all the rightsgiven to him oy law preserved. That since my connection with ihis case in my official capacity I have been spoken to by many persons, citizens and taxpayers of San Fran- cisco, and liable to be called upon to do jury duty therein, and that while many of these gemons being reputable citizens and men of nowledge, have perused the daily papers and have seen such articles as have appeared from time 10 time commenting upon this case, from their conversation with me I am informed and believe, and I therefore state the fact to be, that notwithstanding what they may have read and what they may have seen, or the conversa- tion that they may have had, that those citi- zens and taxpayers who have conversed with me are able to, and would if called upon to serve as jurors, Five this defendant a perfectly fair and impartial trial and render judgment in this case in accordance with theé law and ge evidence as it might be produced before em. I admit that the enormity of the offense with which the defendant is charged aroused the in- | | == Highest of all Ra in Leavening Power.— Latest U. S. Gov’t Report al SEZEHD ABSOLUTELY. PURE _ Bakin j Powder said Durrant was held to answer by the com- mitting magistrate and thereupon Wwas trans- ferred from the custod%ol the Chief of Police to the custody of the Sheriff of this City and County, that at any time by any of the proper officers having charge of said Durrant was any report made to meof any attack uponm, or demonstration against the said Durrant, and at no time since I have been connected with this case have I had the slightest fear of any popular outbreak of hostilities or hostile demonstration against the prisoner. “I, in conclusion, am informed and believe, and therefore allege that there are approxi- mately 300,000 people in said City and County of 8an Francisco, and over 60,000 male citizens therein, ana that from these 60,000 male citizens therein and taxpayers, & just, un- biased and unprejudiced 1“3 may be obtained, and a just, fair and impartial trial may be had in this City and County.” Affidavits of Detectives Anthony, Sey- mour, Silvey and B;rom. Captain Doug- lass, Jailer Battler, Police Judge Conlan, District Attorney Barnes and his assistant, Edward Peixotto, were also read to show that at no time had demonstrations been made against the prisoner; also expressing the belief that he could have a fair and impartial trial in this City. The affidavits were then offered and placed on file. ““These are the atfidavits, if your Honor please,” said the District Attorney, ‘‘upon which we base resistance to the motion made by the defendant for the change of venue. I submit the motion upon these affidavits and ask that it be denied.”” ““We submit the motion upon the part of the defendant,” said General Dickinson, “upon the affidavits already presented.” The matter was at last in the hands of the court, and as his Honor straightened up in his chair all eyes were turned in his direction. The prisoner gave one hasty lance and then turned to look into the ace of his mother, who had arrived 2 few moments before and who occupied a seat at his side. “I have given this matter a zood deal of thought,”” began Judge Murphy, ‘‘since the motion was presented. I have re- freshed my memory as to the showing that was made in" the Goldenson case, which was before me some years ago, and I find that the showing in that case was much stronger than in the case now before | the court. The question as to the propri- ety of the ruling of the court in that case was presented to the Supreme Court and the Supreme Court sustained this court in denying the motion for a change of venue, and no language that I could use isas forcible as that of the Supreme Court, which lays down the rule which must gdvern trial courts in passing upon cases of this kind. “In that case, the Goldenson case, the facts were much stronger than they are in this, yet it appeared in that case that most of the inflammatory articles which are complained of appeared about the time of the occurrence, and that is about the state of facts here. Nearly all the articles of an inflammatory character in this case ap- peared in the month of April, or about that time, so that, so far as the newspaper comments are concerned, they are some- what similar as to time in the two cases. “The language of the Supreme Court in the Goldenson case is as follows: But while the facts stated in the affidavit on behalf of the defendant are admitted to be irue substantially, there are two sufficient reasons why the order of the court below de- nyinfi:he motion for change of venue should not disturbed: 1. Because the principal occurrences upon which affiants for defendant based their belief that a fair and impartial trial could not be had transpired within a few days after the homicide, and the counter affidavits filed by the prosecution tended to show that the excitement which had been aroused by the homicide had entirely subsided, and had not prevailed for three weeks prior to the time of the application for a change of venue. We cannot say that, under the show- ings made by the respective parties, the court abused its discretion in denying the motion, Buch applications are addressed to the sound discretion of the court, and, where error is as- signed, a clear case should be shown by the record, or this court will not interfere. The court below was then in a better tion to weigh the statements of the les and de- termine the truth than this court is now. “That,” continued his Honor, ““I under- stand was the rule laid down by the Bupreme Court, and that ruls was fol- lowed in the case of Fredericks. Now, I say, most of the inflammatory matter com- plained of occurred about the time of the transaction. It could be shown that there are certain articles of the late date, which I consider to be ill advised and improper publications in view of the fact that DURRANT WHISPERING TO HIS MOTHER. [Sketched by a *“ Call” artist.] this motion should not prevail, and, there- fore, the court denies the motion at the present time, denies it_provisionally, with the right to the defendant hereafter, if it be so advised, to renew the motion.” “We note an exception_to the ruling of the court,” said General Dickinson. And that ended it. The expected had happened, and Durrant never turned a hair. He sat calmly in his chair, placing in his buttonhole the red carnation just handed him by his mother, the two whispering the while. It was still twenty- five minutes to 11 o’clock, the hour set for the coming of the panel of jurors, and Judge Murphy ordered & recess till that time. Then began the preparations which fore- shadowed theactual trial. Sheriff Whelan appeared on the scene, and under his orders the deputies began rearranging the furniture in the room. The big table which had stood against the railing facing the court was moved around in a position at right angles with its former situation, 8o that when the attorneys sat at it they would directly face the jury-box. Benches were taken out of the inclosure and chairs substituted, the moving compelling the Durrants—father, mother and son—to stand in full view for the period of a minute, during which all present got a good look at him, When the bustle was all over the attorneys for the defense took geats at the table, flanked by Detective Morse, while Durrant, supported on either side by his father and mother, took a seat directly behind. ‘The mother of the prisoner was, naturally, the object of a good deal of curiosity. But very few in the courtroom had seen her before, and were anxious to see how she was bearing up under the ordeal of her son’s imprisonment and ap- proaching trial. Those who expected to see red eyes and tears and agony depicted upon the face of the unfortunate woman were disappointed. Her eyes were bright, there were no traces of tears, and no agony was reflected 1n the countenance of the pris- oner’s mother. She was calm—more than calm—talking to her son and smiling cheerfully upon him during the entire day in_court. It was wonderful, and could only be explained by a maternal in- stinct which told her that tears and sorrow least tended to help the prisoner face the trial. The father, on the other hand, showed very plainly the strain under which he has been laboring ever since the son’s imprisonment. He absolutely at times looked like one dazed, brightening up only when talking to the accused. By the time the crowds, which had largely angmented by this time, jamming the ?nce between the outer railing and the doors, had settled themselves into some sort of quiet and the bailiff rapsed for order it was 11 o’clock, and Judge Murphy had resumed his seat on the beneh.” Under instructions from his Honor, Clerk Morris began calling the names of jurors. All but eighteen an- swered, and attachments were ordered issued for these, returnable this morning at 10 o’clock. 1 Judge Mur;;hy called the jurors to atten- tion and told "them that every citizen owed it to his countr{ to perform the duty to which they had been called; he was willing to listen to excuses, and hoped that no gflor would offer trivial ones. ‘‘Now,” concluded his Honor, *if any gentleman has an excuse to offer let him come forward."” Nine-tenths of the entire panel rose as one man and started for the bench. They were stopped by the clerks and bailiffs, sworn in blocks, placed in line and for three-gnarters of an hour passed in review before Judge Murphy, pouring into his ear all sorts of pleas for release from jury duty. His Honor, while very strict, was very kind and excused about thirty, many of them on the ground of injury to their business, the greater part of these being working- men, whose families depended upon the fruits of their labor for support. Some claimed exemption as city and county of- ficials, Colin M. Boyd, Fire Commissioner, t one of ;hctm gt.hen wege texcuh‘:ld on the ground of previous j; luty, while Colone{rlflnne vlel;fled his duties with the National Guard. One old man said his wife had rheumatism and weak eyes and he could only exist by working. Judge Murphy excusea him readily. ~Bernard Schloh asked to be excused on the ground that his family wasliving in Marin County. His Honor asked him if he had moved there to avoid jury duty in San Francisco. “I find.” said the court, “many citizens of San Francisco who get the benefit of our Fire Department and our police protection and who move across the bay just to avoid jury duty.” 3 . Mr. Schloh said he had no particular de- sire to avoid the duty, and he was ordered to take his seat, Several others were ex- cused and the court was about to take a recess when General Dickinson arose. “I would like to have an order of court,” he said, *‘directing that the exhibits at- tached to the testimony as taken on the preliminary examination, and now in the property clerk’s possession, be now placed in the possession of the clerk of this court for the convenience of counsel.” ““I object,” said the District Attorney. ““I do not think your Honor has the power to make any sucfi an order.” “I shall decline,”” said his Honor, “to make the order at the present time.” A récess was then taken until 2 o’clock, and when court was called to order at that time every seat in the room was filled. After some littie delay caused by the tardi- ness of General Dickinson, for which Judge Murphy read him a short lecture on mili- tary promptness, the case proceeded. It did not proceed far, however. “Mr. Durrant,’”” said the court, at which the prisoner rose to his feet and faced the bench, while somebody said “Sit down,” ‘‘we are now about to proceed to call jurors to try this case, and the law enjoins upon me the duty of informing you that if you intend to challenge any juror you must do so when the juror appears and before he is sworn.”” Durrant took his seat. Mr. Deuprey asked for a few moments’ delay, awaiting the arrival of General Dickinson, and was making an earnest plea in that direction when the latter walked in. ‘I cannot delay when counsel are dila- tory,” said Judge Murphy, “and I hope that from the military experience and knowledge the general has he will pe promptly on hand in the future.” Messrs. Deuprey awd Dickinzon held a short consultation, when the former ad- dressed the court stating that the defense desired to challenge the entire panel on the ground that the list'of trial jurors had not been selected or returned as required by sections 204 and 209 of the Code of Civil Procedure; that it had not been drawn in accordance with sections 214, 215, 219 and 220 of the code; that it had not been sum- moned in accordance with the provisions of sections 225, 226, 230 and 232, and that it had not been impaneled according to the provisions of sections 246 and 247. Mr. Deuprey offered in evidence the minute-books of the Superior Court con- taining the order of the Judges in bank of January 7, 1895, with reference to grand and geuy jurors. Mr. Coffroth, secretary to the Judges, was sent for and produced the minute-book and was himself placed on the stand. He read an order foc the selec- tion of 3600 petty and 144 grand jurors for the year. (fiwstioned closely by Mr. Deu- prey he admitted that beyond that he had made no other entries. Judge Murphy questioned as to what had actually oc- curred in pursuance of that order, but General Dickinson objected on the ground that the record was the best evidence. Judge Murphy was plainly annoyed at the failure of the secretary to write up the minutes of the Judges’ meetings and toid him so plainly. Mr. Deuprey then called for the list of 3600 setty jurors selected. It was ascer- tained that it was in the County Clerk’s office. A messenger sent there came back with the information that the list wasin a vault, of which only Mr. Piper, the chief deputy, had the combination, and that Mr. Piper could not be found. The court or- dered a recessof fifteen minutes, at the end of which time County Clerk Curry appeared and informed the court that Mr. Piper was out of town and would not re- turn until evening. The Judge said something about the ne- cessity of Mr. Piper's being in his office when needed, and ordered Mr. Curry to gruduce the list in court this morning, Mr. iper or no Piper, and then ordered an ndllournmenr until this morning at 10 o’clock. FRUIT INDUSTRY MENACED A Destructive Auction Sale War in New York and Chicago. Compromise Measures Are Frus- trated by the Natlonal Fruit Association. H. Weinstock of Sacramento, who is president of the California Fruit Growers’ and Shippers’ Association, has submitted to the ‘‘National Fruit Association” a measure looking toward the establishment of a consolidated auction-room in New York City. Said he: “The demoralization of California fruit prices in the markets of New York and Chicago is a matter over which the grow- ers of the entire State are doing u deal of thinking just now. The prospect is not bright for an immediate adjustment of vending difficulties. On the contrary. In New York it is an auction war between rival organizations for the privilege of handling California fruit. The several fac- tions claim that the highest prices are ob- tainable at their res pective places. *Shippers are divided, prices are cut and a general demoralization takes place, in many cases iorc‘u:g the grower to dispose gf higlfrmt below the actual cost of produc- on, So the California Fruit Growers’ and Shippers’ Association made the offer of a central fruit auction scheme for New York as follows: ‘The growers and shippers of California fruit to continue to ship over the Erie and West Shore roads respectively as they do at present, and to continue to employ their respective re- ceivers and auctioneers as at present, but all receivers and auctioneers, with r;he,conlznt of the West Bhore and Erie Railway compa- nies, shall agree to alternate the sales in the auction-rooms on the respective docks. In other words, Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays of each week the sales shall take place on the West Bhore pier; Tuesdays, Thursdays and Saturdays, the sales shall be held on the Erie pier; the buyers examining the fruit on both piers before the hour of sale, then ad- journing to the salesroom on the West Shore pier or the Erie pier, as the case may be, and there attend the auction. If there is any ad- vantage as to sales taking place on any of the days of the week, g0 arrange the days of sale that neither saie, nor any receiver or auc- tioneer, nor any shipper or grower, nor an. fruit will enjoy any advantage not partici- pated in by all the others. To this proposition the following reply was received: H. Weinstock, President California Fruit Grow- ers’ and Shippers’ Association—DEAR SIR: We are in receipt of the following telegram from 8gobel & Day, which is self-explanatory : “Having conferred with prominent buyers, we find proposed compromise impracticable, even if consented to by the National Fruit As- sociation. Ruhlman & Joralemon positively refuse. The National Fruit Association is sat- isfied they are carrying out the wishes of the growers more thoroughly by continuing their daily auctions on ‘the "Erie, where better prices are obtainable and larger number best buyers congregate. We will do everything reasonable to concentrate all sales on Erie wharf, where for eight years past all California fruit has been sold. Itisunaccount- able to us wny growers and shippers consign- ing through Kari and Porter do not demand that their fruit shall be sold on Erie. While we recognize that sentiment against the Na- tional has been manufactured in California during the last sixty days, we know we are Hfim n our position in New Yorlk, and time will prove the correctness of our views. Very truly yours, H. A. FAIRBANK.” Mr. Weinstock, in speaking of thismatter Eeshrduy, said: “The California Fruit rowers’ and Shippers’ Association were prompted to submit to the National Fruit Association this compromise measure, be- lieving that the National Fruit Association was acting in good faith when it repeatediy expressed itself in favor of the idea of establishing a consolidated auction-room in New York, so that the grower might get what his fruit was worth in that city, and when it stated that it was anxious to comply with the gbl:wm’ wishes in that respect if it coudd done on a fair and uitable basis. The reply made by the ational Fruit Association would make it seem, however, that it apparently is not in sympathy with the fruit-growers’ wishes to establish a consolidated auction-room in New York. ““The two reasons offered by the National Fruit Association in its letter for declining the compromise are: First, that better prices are obtainable on the Erie pier, where the sales are held; secondly, that having conferred with prominent {myers in New York it finds the proposed compro- mise impracticable. Analyzing these two reasons we find that better prices have not, as a rule, been obtained on the Erie, as shown by the following comparative rices from the 8th to the 12th of July, the test available figures: g Jnlon [Erle esroom. Salesroom. 1858 Bartlett pears. $274 668 Bartlett pe $258 1435 Cherries. 130 1098 Cherries. 113 196 Royal Hative pinm: 121 226 Royal Hative plams.. 108 8731 Tragedy prunes, 197 188 151 138 £ 717 Hale’s Early peachs, 116 74 Purple Duane plums.... 169 14 Purple Duane plums. 140 _Aggregating the prices realized in both auc- tions, the results show that for the five days the average prices realized were over 10 per cent higher in the union salesroom. The pre- caution has been taken, so far as possible, to verify the above figures from numerous cata- logues received at this end from both auction- houses. These catalogues, showing prices re- alized, are published by both auction compa- nies after the sale has taken place, and asa rule mailed each day to California. “Taking up the second reason, that hay- ing conferred with dpromincnt buyers in New York, they find that the proposed compromise is impracticable, we would like to ask why it is impracticable for the buy- ers to examine the fruit on both docks and then congregate in one salesroom where it is to be offered for sale. It is certainly more practicable to do this than it would be to move the fruit from one dock to the | other. It was to be expcted that the buy- ers in New York would oppose a consoli- dated auction-room, for precisely the same reason that the Chicago buyers opposed an auction-room. Itisto the interest of the Eastern buyer that he should get the fruit as much below its value as possible; two auction-rooms enables him to do this to a large degree, because one grower’s fruit is brought into competition with an- other; whereas a consolidated auction- room means that the buyer must pay whatever the fruit is wortk, hence 1t is natural that he will oppose a consolidated auction salesroom. “The rejection of the compromise measure by the National Fruit Association frustrates the consolidated auction idea so earnestly demanded by the fruit-growers throughout the State and thus threatens to make permanent two auction sales- rooms in New York, which is one of the grave evils that in recent years has so seriously menaced the welfare of the Cali- fornia fruit industry. “In Chicago the difficulty, though origin- ating in a different source, amounts to about the same thing for the grower. The Merchants’ Fruit Auction Company of Chicago, in order to crowd out the petty buyers, established a closed auction-house, in ogposition to the union auction-rooms conducted in that city by the California Fruit Growers’ and Shippers’ Association. In a circular recently issued they announce that their sales are open to all ‘reputa- ble’ buyers. Concerning this kind of competition, Mr. Weinstock said: ‘‘The real motive for the establishing of a rival auction-house under the patronage of the Merchants’ Fruit Auction Company is made plain in that part of their circular which reads, ‘Our sales are open to all reputable fruit- dealers’” The question arises, what is a reputable dealer? The Merchants’ Fruit Auction Company would tell us that a reputable fruit-dealer is a member of their association, leaving the inference that all others are disreputable, and will therefore not be permiti to bid on the grower’s produce offered in their auction-room however much they may want to buy and however much they may want to pay. This, of course, will permit the ‘reputable’ dealers to continue, asin the past, to make their own combinations and to allow the grower for his fruit what- ever pittance their generosity may dictate. Whypnot 20 a step jurther and hold that only those consumers who are members of certain associations and who are reputable shall be permitted to buy California fruits at retail, all others bein% forbidden to buy or to eat our fresh fruits i “The California grower is not interested in knowing whether the buyer of his fruit is u member of any particular association or whether he ‘is reputable or otherwise. The grower’s object is to get the full value of his fruit, and” in order to secure this }'ne must be ready and willing to invite bids for his product from every one who is pre= pared to buy his fruit in the open marke whatever may be the commercial or socia. standing of the buyer and regardless of his connections with any buyers’ associations. “The question, and the only question for the grower to consider, is, Shall there be two auction-rooms conducted in New York to hisloss? And shall there be two auc- tion-rooms conducted in Chicago, one of them a closed auction, where the fruit of one grower shall be slaughtered and used as a club against the fruit of another grower 2"’ MIDWINTER FAIR CHINESE. The Troupe Desirous of Performing ut the Atlanta Cotton Expo- sition. Collector Wise and several of his depus ties made a trip into Chinatown Wednes- day night and collected a band of thirty- eight Midwinter Fair Chinese actors and musicians who were specially imported to this country nearly two years ago to pre- | sent Chinese dramatic art at the recent exposition. Shortly after the closing of the lafe fair the Midwinter Exvosition Company con- cluded that it would be more economical to send this troupe on to the Atlanta E position than to return the actors to China according to the contract, and bring out | another troupe from the Flowery King- dom. To this end the company petitioned the Treasury Department at Washington for permission to send the Midwinter Fair Chinese actors to the Atlanta Fair. Col- lector Wise, in view of the petition, was permitted to delay the deportation of the | troupe pending a decision of the Treasury Department. In order to secure himself, he obtained from the company a bond binding the Chinese actors_to appear for deportation in case the decision should be adverse to the petitioners. Since the close of the fair the Chinese actors have been presenting Asiatic dramatics in the local Chinese theaters. Notwithstanding the bond, Col- lector Wise felt it his duty to keep an eye upon the actors. TRIBUTE TO A. N. TOWNE. Central Pacific Directors Meet and Do Honor to His Memory. The directors of the Central Pacific Com- pany met yesterday and received a report from a committee appointed at a previous meeting to prepare a memorial of the late A. N. Towne. The committee submitted its report in the form of a communication reviewing the career and professional labors and ad- vancement of the departed manager, and setting forth his many fine qualities with good grace. Viewed in the licht of a citizen, Mr. Towne was given this tribute: “He was a student of the industrial de- velopment of the State of California and lent willing aid to every effort toward establishing here a higher civilization. As a friend he was generous and true: asa husband and father he was loving and de- voted. In all relations of life he left an example worthy of the highest emulation.” ——————— A Young Impostor. The police were notified yesterday that aboy about 12 years of age has been imposing upon merchants on Sansome, Front and Battery streets. He has been selling tickets for the raffle of a gold watch for the genefltu( the fam- ily of “Jim Petersen, a teamster,” to take place at Seventh and Brannan streets to-morrow. In- quiry was made among teamsters and the rafle was declared a fraud, as none of them knew +“Jim Petersen.” The boy is described as neatly dressed in dark clothés and knickerbocker annloons, and his most striking featureisa 2 at, peculinrly shaped nose. What'’s the matter with the other people in the trade ? Has that one little word ‘‘Why” been the cause of all these outbursts; all these sudden ‘‘sales,” all the8e wild replies and all this mud slinging ? WHY "Can it be that the prices and the patronage of the people during this big sale of ours has created all this terrible rushing into print and sudden wondrous offerings ? WhY WHY * We don’t take Ten Dollar Suits and mark them ‘‘$20,” then ‘‘reduce” them to ‘“‘$11,” and hide our ‘‘fine goods” in the basement ! Neither do we sell clothing that : has been on our counters for ‘“Thirty Years.” Ours is the new, fresh, up- to-date kind, and we are very busy, WHY do you wonder The finest Clothing that money can buy during our The DISSOLUTION SALE. CHAS. KEILUS & CO., Sutter and Hub. P WHY Kearny Sts.