The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, August 18, 1895, Page 5

THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, SUNDAY, AUGUST 18, 1895. 5 R, HASKINS WROTE LIKE A SCHOOLBOY, Variations of His Pen-| manship as Viewed by an Expert. THE : WIDOW’S DEFENSE. | Mr. Eisenschimel, a “Profes-} sor of Forgery,” Says the Will Is Genuine. WMANY NEW WITNESSES HEARD. Story of the Finding of the Wilis | Among Old Papers and Under the House. Mrs. Elizabeth Haskins is mg}zing a strong defense of her band’s !_\'1.1. Ex- | pert Eisenschimel declared positively yes- | terday that the will ad d to proba}e could not be a fc several wit- nesses were called to s that there had been ill feeling between the two brothers, James and William Haskins, as the latter had induced his father, who owned a $3000 estate, to disinherit James. A long estrangement followed, and the brothers were eventually brought together again through the influence of Mrs. Hes- kins, the wife of James. Mrs. Haskins wept as the lawyer went over the story of her married life, and Mar- garet Craven comforted her. scene did not last long, tnough, for the op-| posing counsel knew no sentiment and ex- | Senator Ford engaged Mr. Wright in a | quarrel over prosaic lezal questions as to | whether some of the assertions were rele- vant, material and competent in the case. Mrs. Craven was absent during the early part of the session, but her daughter and several other young ladies were present. Expert Eisenschimel was on hand all day and with an air of wisdom he gazed through his spectacles and a big micro- scope at the exhibits of handwriting al- { ready submitted. Mrs. Haskins testified in her own behalf that when she married Mr. Haskins on February 6, 1862, she had $7000 of her own. She gave her husband the use of the funds, and a portion of her .money was used in the construction of the house on Leaven- worth street. This house she conveyed to her husband by deed, and it is a portion of the estate | bequeathea in each of the eleven wills that have been brought to-light. _“My husband was quite .sick at the time,” said Mrs. Haskins. “He told me that if he was sick very long he would AuDITOR HEYVER AnD AT BP0 YZ R T N -~ = Some of the Features of the Haskins Contest. [From a sketch made by 6 “Call” artist.] of the discovery of this will’and other wills in the famous series. Sesi this main evidence on the con- mony was offered to show that state involved was community prop- , and further, that the house and land at the corner of Leavenworth and Green- wich streets stands legally in the name of Mrs. Haskins. Even if the will should be broken the widow’s claims would cover at least three-quarters of the estate, but a large amount of testimony in support of the will has been given and there are many witnesses yet to be neard. Lansing Mizner of Benicia, attorney for Mark Levingston in the Fair will contest, was an interested spectator in the court yesterday. Heconversed much of the time ith Mrs, Haskins and her friends, but took rt in the case. Carl Eisenschimel, the handwriting ex- pertfor the defense, was an entertaining tness as he gave a blackboard lecture on his calling. “I attended the schools in Vienna, not such schools as we have in this country,” le said by way of introduction. “My structors were the very best, and with these I made very rapid progress.” Mr. Eisenschimel was not at all bashful in telling about his qualifications, and he stated that he had been a specialist in ‘“‘pen art’’ for twenty-two years. “Do you ever imitate the handwriting of others as a matter of instruction?” Mr. Deuprey asked. g “] am a professorof forgery, in a certain fou dre called on to imitate signa- tures?’’ “Yes, sir; I do that every week in my business.” “Can you imitate a name so that the for- gery cannot be detected ?” o that it can be detected only by ex- perts.”” : an you distinguish a forgery from the ! signature?” ‘I can.” The will of August 6, 1888, which has | been admitted to probate, was handea to | the writer. % 2 at was written and signed by James Haskins,” said the witness. *Is it a forgery 2’ “It is not.” - “What are the peculiarities of Mr: Haskins’ handwriting?”’ “In all his writing I find a tendency . coming down from -his schooldays. It shows neglect of education or practice in that line. “His handwriting appeared always the same, but the letters were made in many ways. I have examined a hundred or more of his signatures, the bank signatures and others, and I find that there arevery many differences, though there are peculiarities which cannot be imitated. % ‘Sometimes -Mr. Haskins made-a very fancy D and sometimes a very plain one, altogether different. These exceptions were his freaks, not his habit. “He usuaily made the I something like a I. But what does he do? Write that way always? No! Here'is as fine an I as any- body could make. . “In one of his letters I find a very fancy. style of B, the only one .of the kind in all of the documents thathave been produced. T'he capital’ J was sometimes written en- tirely above the line, and there dare many variations of that letter. “Defective spelling was the rule, I am astonished to find that in one -instance JAr. Haskins ° spelled his first name J m-e-s. Letters were very often omit- ed from the words that he wrote.”’ Mr. Eisenschimel illustrated his declara- ions with imitations on the blackboard. de will resume his testimony to-morrow. In his opening address for the defense have to go to the poorhouse. I' gave him the property in the hope that it would cheer him up. He was opposed to the transfer, but I had the deed drawn up and | recorded.” The question of the will-writing ‘was then taken up. “Did your husband have some peculiar | habit relating to his birthdays?’ asked Attorney Wright. “He usually made a will.” “A will every birthday?'’ “Nearly every year. “Did you ever see any of these wills?"” “Yes; they are here in court.” “How did you find the will of 1879, that was written on a board ?” “I was hunting for a board to fix the | gate. My husband usually put on the | joists under the house any good pieces of | oard that he might find, and I looked | there. A lady was with me and she found | the piece of board with the will. “*‘Here, Mrs. Haskins, see this,’ said my | friend. ‘There’s writing on it.’ ! “Did you write the will of 18882” the attorney asked. | £ digno'., sir.” “Did you procure it to be written ?” “I did not, sir.” “Did you writeany of these other wills?” *“No, sir.” “Did you procure any of them to be writ- ten?” 1 did not.” Mr. Ford intimated that Mrs. Haskins and her husband had frequently quarreled, but the witness replied that there never | had been any trouble of that kind. The testimony given by Charles Heint- zen of Forest City, who said that on New The pathetic | produced in_court were all written by the same man?” Mr. Sarony asked. “I do,” was the reply. & The juror went into the general discus- sion of penmanship, and then some more witnesses were called by the defense. Mrs. Eliza Kutner - testified that in March, 1894, she visited her friend, Mrs. Haskins, to confer with her about a busi- ness matter. While looking through a trunk to find a written agreement in rela- tion to a lease Mrs. Haskins found a sealed envelope bearing the addres: ‘‘Mrs. James Haskins.” The envelope was torn open and the will of 1888 was found therein. ‘“‘Oh, that’s nothing,’ said Mrs. Has- kins,” the witness coniinued. “Then she was going to tear up the will, but I told her not to and she put the will back in the trunk.” Edward B. Laughlin, a tenant in Mrs. Haskins’ house, testified that Mr. and Mrs. Haskins had always seemed devoted to each other. No discord ever seemed to exist. Mr. Laughlin had been in the real estate business and on one occasion Mr. Haskins told him that the property stood in the name of Mrs. Haskins. Stephen Roberts, an old friend of the family, gave, similar testimony, declaring that James Hasking had said to him, “What’s mine is my wife's.” Charles W. Heyer, auditor of the Ger- man Bank, produced a lot of ponderous volumes to show the Haskins signatures. “One or two of the jurors proceeded to question the witness and Judge Coffey ap- parently accepted an opportunity to refer to the chewing-gum. ‘‘Gentlemen of the jury,’’ said the Judge. “You must not ask questions of witnesses or counsel without special permission of the court. You are expected to use your eyes and your ears, but not your mouths.” A witness to the discovery of the pine- board will under the Haskins house was Annie Laughlin, the actual finder of the board. Miss Laughlin is a sister of Edward B. Laughlin, a previous witness. The official inventory of the Haskins estate is as follows: On deposit in the German Savings Bank.$ 4,800 00 On deposit in the Savings and Loan Mr. Deuprey declares that in any event the real estate cannot be included in the James Haskins inventory, as it was con- veyed to the husband in a deed of gift dated October 16, 1889, and the Supreme Court has decided in the case of Requa vs. Brandenstein that any such deed by a wife to husband prior to the legislative amend- ment of 1891 is void. Mrs, Haskins stated in court that she | received $7000 at the time of her marriage, the money having been left to her by her | arents. She and her husband went to Sorest City. There they buried the money, | having no bank to put it in, but they dug it up afterward and came to San Francisco. | With that money the house on Leaven- | worth street was built. The property was deeded by Mr. Haskins to his wife, but a reconveyance, as already stated, was after- | ward made. IMPROVEMERTS OF NOTE, The Grant-Avenue Hammam Baths Rebuilt and Re- furnished. In All Artistic and Sclentific Re- spects Unsurpassed In the Unlon. house on Grant avenue, near Market street, has been entirely rebuilt and refurnished. The work has engaged the servicesof a large force of carpenters, decoratorsand electricians for several weeks, and cost many: thousands of dollars. In order to make it an ‘“up-to-date” bathhouse, Charles Sladky, the proprietor, while on his tour of the world, from which he re- turned a few months ago, inspected all the principal bathing establishments of the Eastern States and Europe. In fact this was the principal object of his tour. San Franciscans may find much to inter- est and instruct them in the latest improve- ments of these baths. The key to the whole honse 1s the magnificent hall and | reception-rooms for ladies and gentlemen. They are irregular in shape, and full of | surprises and delights. They are a mar- | vel of what can be done with ‘marble, mir- | rors, electric lights and the frescoers’ | brush. The designs of the incandescent | lights are intricate, and the frescoings are [Drawn from a photograph produced in court by Mrs. Haskins.] JAMES HASKINs, THE MAN WHO AND THEN HIv IT. WROTE A WILL EVERY YEAR Year’s day, 1891, Mr. Haskin’s told him he had never made a will, was contradicted in many particulars. Mrs. Haskins testified that on the day in question Mr. Heintzen was not at the house. S *You clearly ember the events of that day, do you 5 “hiah.’) 5 2 “Did you have a turkey for dinner?” “No; we bad a goose.” Mrs. Haskins was uestioned about the burning of Forest City, about the - effect of the fire on her "husband’s property and about the Live Yankeé¢ mine :mg other in- terests of the Haskins brothers. 4 There was little in the whole history of the Haskins family that the attorney’ left out of his inquiry. All this time seven out of the twelve members of the jury chewed gum, with which Louis Sarony had’kept them . sup- Hed. Mr. Sarony is a member of the jury and he carries -a stock of gum from the candy factory every day. en Pro- fessor Mitchell, the writing expert for the contestants, was recalled, the jurors ob- tained permission to question him. sarlier in the day, Attorney Wright stated “Do you think that the Haskins leitres full of delicate suggestions. The whole is of Moorish design with harmonious fur- nishings that only a visitor who had ran- sacked the Orient could plan or perfect. Turning from an artistic to a scientific view of the place, one finds every provision known to any modern bathing establish- .| ment in the world. Every bath approved by the medical world is here represented; such as the Turkish, electric, carbonic acid, su;shur, mercurial, steam baths in three grades, and shower baths that are a distinctly new thing in this City. Artistically and scientifically the place is such as to appeal to the most critical taste, and assume rank as one of the most promi- nent features of San Francisco. ———————— Excursion to Ukiah. . The Cross-country Club has arranged a select family excursion to go to Ukiah next Sunday, the 25th inst. The advertisement of the trip thus concisely states some of the advantages: “Seats guaranteed. Ticketslimited. No musie or dancing. Good eamlny assured.” Tickets (§2 for the round , children half-rates) may_ be obtained at the club's headguarters, 119 Powell street. The interior of the big Hammam Bath- | 4 hehe | sult of their interviews with bim were sub- | DURRANT IN THE BELFRY, Two Witnesses Saw Him There With Different Young ' Women. WILL APPEAR AND TESTIFY. Mrs. Leak, the All-Important Wit~ ness, Is Greatly Annoyed by Visltors. THE DURRANT CASE IN A MINUTE—-MORE WIINESSES FOR THE PROSECUTION. Two additional witnesses for the prosecution, in addition to Mrs. Caroline S, Leak, have been discovered by the police. They are A. Kellner, a contractor residing at 948 Mission street, and John Rosh, a carpenter residing at 120 Tenth street. They state positively that while build- ing the roof on the auditorium of Emmanuel Baptist Church in September, 1893, they saw Durrant on two oceasions ascend to the belfry in company with & young lady. This evi- dence, while not bearing directly upon the case, {s produced by the prosecution for the purpoge of showing beyond a doubt that Dur- rant had been in the habit, before the disap- vearance and murder of Blanche Lamont, of visiting the church in company with a lady companion, and also that he was familiar with the ascent to the belfry. Mrs. Leak, the other new witness, has been considerably annoyed since her name hasbeen mentioned in connection with the case by a constant stream of visitors wishing to see ber onone pretext or another. She dislikes the publicity that has been thrust upon her, and will probably take a trip to the country to e 7195 3 Land at Leavenworth and Greenwich avoid it. streets........... s 6,87500 | Since the knowledge of the nature of Mrs. Family residence thereon 1,125 00 | reak’s testimony has become public property ..$12,874 95 | it is stated that the defense will again renew its motion for & change of yenue, Judge Murphy having indicated, when he denied the former motion, that, at another time, were the application made on & proper showing, he would entertain it. Concerning this state- ment the attorneys for the defense have noth- ing to say, and only time will tell. Note To THE READER —If you wish only to know what was actually accomplished in the Durrant case yesterday the foregoing summary will give you ihat information. If, however, 1t is your desire to learn the particulars of this interesting trial you will find subjoined a clear, succinct, impartial account ot all important matters. Under no circumstances will the offensive detzils be admitted. They are not | essential to au intelligent understanding of the progress of the case, and will be accorded no place in these columns. Interest in the Durrant case, already at a fever heat, was ‘considerably heightened yesterday by the announcement from the police that they had discovered other new witnesses besides Mrs. Caroline S. Leak. There are two of them and their testimony, while not bearing directly on the case, establishes beyond a doubt that Durrant, previous to the disappearance of Blanche Lamont, had visited the belfry of Emman- uel Baptist Church several times—each time in the custody of a young lady. These witnesses are A. Kellner, a con- tractor residing at 947 Mission street, and John Rosh, a carpenter residing at 120 | Tenth street, They were called upon on August 7 by Detective Gibson and as a re- penaed to testify at the trial. Mr. Kellner states positively that he saw Durrant ia the belfry of the church with a young lady in September, 1893, and Mr. Rosh, who was present on one of these | occasions, bears him out to that extent. Kellner had the contract for constructing the roof of the present anditorium in the fchurch and Rosh was in his employ. One afternoon while alone at the work, Kellner states, he saw Durrant ascending the stairs leading to the beliry, assisting a very good-looking girl up. He was ac- quainted with Durrant nng could not be mistaken as to his identity. He did not know the young lady. A few days later, while Rosh was with him, they both saw Durrant’ with another young lady on the belfry stairs. On each occasion the young | peopie remained aloft about fifteen min- ute The police { pretty far bac realize that this is going , but upon discovering the witnesses it was resolved to subpena them to show if possible that Durrant had visit- ed the grewsome belfry several times with young women. This testimony may not be allowed in, and it is not the intention to press the matter. They were subpenaed merely to save a possible point and to be used in case of an emergency. As it is there is not a doubt but what the prosecu- tion is satisfied with the mass of evidence it has gathered against Durrant, and es- pecially with the testimony of Mrs. Caro- line 8. Leak. All stories to the contrary Mrs. Leak’s evidence cannot fail to be impressive. Despite the fact that several persons inimi- cal to the prosecution have stated to re- vorters for THE CALL that Mrs. Leak is given to gossip, their statements go for naught in the face of her exemplary life, her excellent reputation and the voluntary testimonials to her character given by her friends. 1f she 1s nothing more, Mrs. Leak is a bright, well-preserved woman, in the full use of every faculty, and her testi- mony was only offered to the State after the full and deliberate conviction that such a course was the enly one to pursue. She has a son and daughter of her own, the latter, a Mrs. Burke, residing at Palo Alto or San Mateo, and, knowing what an ex- emplary young man Durrant sppeared to be, she hesitated to give testimony that would plunge the son of another woman into trouble. That is the reason why she hesitated long after her mind had been made up to the firm belief that he was the man_ who had lured Blanche Lamont to her death. When at last, however, Mrs. Leak be- came_ convinced that her further silence would be an absolute flying in the face oi providence she unbosomed her story to the police, and then and there, for “several reasons, it was agreed that her name should not be used in connection with the case until the very moment she was called to the witness-stand. In the first place, Mrs. Leak feared the notoriety that she knew would follow in the wake of pub- licity. She wanted to be bothered neither by callers nor reporters, and for that rea- son, if there had been no other, Captain Lees decided to say nothing concerning the lady or her testimony. The captain had, bowever, another and a weightier reason. From his observation and that of his men he had arrived .at the conclusion that the defense provosed to make a vigorous attack to weaken if not wholly impeach the testimony of the witness Martin Quinlan. Satisfied of this, he proposed to let Durrant’s counsel go ahead and do their worst, fully convinced that any attack they might make on Quinlan would only rebound witn double force upon the head of the defendant when Mrs. Leak told the story that would corroborate that of the attorney witness to 4 nicety. That was the powerful reason impelling the Police Department and the prosecu- tion to secrecy in the matter of Mrs. Leak. But the matter came out, and for the past two days the Hackett residence at 124 Bartlett street, where the all-impor- tant witness resides, has been hauntes by ail sorts and conditions of people. To most of these she has been denied, al- though she has not gone to the country as had “been stated. Detective Seymour called upon her yesterday afternoon had a long talk. He found her somewhat disturbed and anuoyed at the notoriety the discovery of her connection with the case had already occasioned. Mrs. Leak stated to the detective, howevyer, that she did not propose to be harassed, and would positivefy refuse to grant interviews for publication. B | tee of arrangements. Mrs. Leak was the publication, uninten- tionally, of a statement that she had been divorced from her husband. This is not true. There has been a separation and the husband, Crapo Leak, is living at Gloversville, N. Y. The son. Mondulla .Leak, now at the head of the Leak Adver- tising Company, was formerly a partner of Louis D. Radgesty of 411 Market street, this City, in the Leak Glove Manufactur- ing Company of Gloversville, N. Y. Mrs. Leak is comfortably provided for and sews merely to keep herself occupied. That is the true story of the newest and strongest witness for the prosecution, and against the chain of evidence in which she forms the connecting link it is impossible for the prosecution to see where even an alibi can be proven for Durrant. Yet,in face of it all, the defense is to all intents and purposes just as confident to-day of its agimy to establish the innocence of Durrant” beyond cavil as it ever was. Again and again has General Dickinson stated that that alibi could and would be proved and the other principal personages connected with the defense state that they are of the same opinion still. For the present that is the way the case stands. Tach side proclaims its belief in the ultimate triumph of its own presenta- tions; and yet there is a gap of four in the jury which, from past experiences, it would seem it would be hard to fill. To-morrow the trial will have entered u%ou its fifth week, and but two-thirds of the jury have been secured. One thousand and fifty veniremen have been drawn from the trial-jury box and all but 125 of them have been passed on in some way or another. The defense has exhausted only eight of its peremptory chailenges and ine prosecu- tion four of itsten. At this rate anotner cheerless vista of three weeks is expected to be consumed in filling the box, if it is accomplished at the end of that time. And this doubt as to the ability to secure a jury, together with certain questions put to veniremen by Mr. Deuprey upon exam- ination concerning what influences certain publications had had upon their minds, has led to the belief that the defense in- tends to renew its motion for a change of venue. It has not been stated that it will, but taking all in all it is just within the probabilities that the accused will not be tried in San Francisco. Time will only tell, and pending the filling of the jury-box it is dragging slowly enough. SAUSALIT'S BIG FETE An Enthusiastic Meeting Held Yesterday and a Commit- tee Appointed. The *“Night In Naples” Carnival Is Taking On the Form of a Certainty. The public meeting held in Sausalito yesterday to take definite action on the proposed “*Night in Naples” entertainment | did its work quickly and with perfect har- mony. The sentiment favoring the event has grown since the holding of the prelim- inary meeting last Wednesday. Dr. Crumpton called the meeting to or- der and Commodore Harrison was selected as permanent chairman. J. H.-Pryor of the News was made secretary. A number of short speeches were made and a motion prevailed that the chairman appoint a committee of three whose auty it shall be to select four more, these seven to form the permanent executive commit- Commodore Harri- son appointed .on this committee: Gen- eral Dickinson, as representative of the town of Sausalito; Commodore Bruce of the California Yacht Club, as refi esenting the yachting interests, and J. B. Stetson, in behalf of the transportation business. The selection met with the unanimous ap- proval of the meeting. This committee will meet on Monday morning to select the four other members, and the disposition of the citizens will be immediately ascertained and the work pushed with vigor. Colonel J. E. Slinkey made a brief but enthusiastic talk favoring the carnival and said that he was of the opinion that it could be made a grand success. M. M. Barpet, upon invitation of the chair through the request of Dr. Crump- ton, spoke at some length and urged im- mediate action. He said that Sausalito’s delightful situation afforded the oppor- tunity to make.one of the grandest dis- plays of the kind ever witnessed. Manager Stetson of the North Pacific Coast Railway discussed the exhibition with a great deal of enthusiasm. “Itwill no doubt be urged,” he said, “that my offer to give $500 toward this affair is a business proposition. Well, that is true in a sense. The steamers and the trains will carry a great many visitors here, and they will pay their fare. But the contribution of $500 added to the extra expense of trans- portation will double the cost and it will necessitate the carrying of 2000 people to cover that. But this is a business proposi- tion for the town of Sausalito. This sort of an attraction will draw more residents to this beautiful town as ‘The Nights in Venice” have increased the population of Belvedere. *‘The people in the cities appreciate these displays, and especially will the illustra- tion of the bursting of the volcano be an interesting feature. We ean make this a grand success, and one of the biggest things ever seen on wateror land.” Mr. Tidball, who has managed many car- nivals and similar displays on this coast, was present, and was invited to speak. He said that Sausalito could do something original in this carnival and present a dis- play that had never been equaled. Word was received from Commodore Gutte of the San Francisco Yacht Club, saying he would aid the project to the ex- tent of $500. Commodore Caduc of the Pacific Yacht Club, A. W. Foster, presi- dent of the San Francisco and North Pacific Railway Company, and Captain G. W. Thomas also sent to the meeting their hearty approval of the scheme, and offered to do their share toward its success. JUSTICE BLINDED. The Case of George Thomas Moran, a Police Court ** Grafter,”” Being In- vestigated by Judge Low. One of the peculiar ways in which justice is deceived came to light yesterday, and Judge Low is to make a thorough investi- gation to find out who is responsible. George Thomas Moran was arrested on May 4 for vagrancy and threats against life. The latter charge was for threaten- ing to kill a woman who had been sup- vorting him for over a year. He was re- leased on $500 bonds, but_on May 11 the bond was set aside by Judge Low and Moran was ordered into custody because he had renewed his threats to kill the woman. When the case was called on May 16 the woman refused to prosecute on the charge of theats to kill, and Judge Low convicted Moran on the charge of vagrancy and sen- tenced him to six months in the House of Correction. Attorney McGrath filed a no- tice of appeal with Clerk Sullivan that day, and on May 20 an order of discharge was presented at the House of Correction for Moran’s release, purporting to be signed by Judge Low, and he was released. This order of discharge has been mis- placed at the House of Correction and can- not be found. Judge Low says he did not sign it and did not accept any bond on ap- peal which, as ‘committing magistrate, should have been presented to him for ac- ceptance. Besides, no statement of appeal was received by Clerk Sullivan. Moran was one of the ‘‘grafters” arrested last Tuesday for vagrancy, and the atten- tion of Judge Low was called to his pre- vious arrest and conviction. He at once issued a bench warrant for Moran’s arrest. He was taken before Judge Bahrs yester- day, who affirmed the judgment of the lower court and Moran was sent to the House of Correction. After serving his six months he will have to_stand his trial for Among the annoyances occasioned to | ‘‘grafting’’ around the Police courts, SCHISM N CON, VIRGINIA Spring Accuses Superinten- dent Lyman of Manipula- ting the Stock. THE CHARGES NOT SUSTAINED, The Investigation Adjourned for One Month to Secure Further Testimony. Yesterday afternoon the directors of the Con. Virginia mine assembled at the office of the company in the Nevada block, to consider certain -charges that had been preferred on the part of certain stock- holders by Edward F. Spring of the Report against D. B. Lyman, superinten- dent of the mine at Virginia City. The specifications appeared in the form of a letter from Mr. Spring to the president of the company, charging Mr. Lyman with having operated in certain newly discov- ered ores in such a way as to show them to be unprofitable and with having specu- lated heavily on the stock market, in the mean time having manipulated the ore so as to advance his own interests, to the detriment of the stockholders of the com- pany. The meeting was called to order by Pres- ident Kish, Directors O'Connor, Messer, Wells and Zadig _also being present. Mr. Spring and Mr. Lyman were present and were represented by Attorneys Edmund Tauszky and W. E. F. Deal, respectively. The letter from Mr. Spring which con- tained the charges against Superintendent Lyman was read. President Fish stated that he had informed Mr. Lyman of the charges and that Lyman had denied them, at the same time offering the board of di- rectors an opportunity to fully inspect the books of his brokers in this City as to his dealings on the stock board. President Fish stated that Mr. Lyman’s brokers had copied his accounts in all transactions had with them and that he, the president, had inspected said accounts and found that in this particular, at least, Mr. Spring’s charges were unfounded. Mr. Spring de- sired to investigate the books personally, but President Fish stated that Superin- tendent Lyman had offered the books for the inspection of the board only and that he objected to Mr. Spring looking into them, as, aside from the purposes offered. they were his own personal accounts. Mr. Spring was invited to produce the evidence to substantiate the charges made. Mr. Spring stated that the letter before them was sufficient to put the matter be- fore the board, and that the members should investigate the matter themselves. Dr. M. A. Cachot was then called as a wit- ness on behalf of the prosecution, and stated that it was common rumor upon the street that Lyman was buying and seiling stocks, depending for their valuation upon reports as to the wealth of the ore in the Consolidated Virginia. i Mr. Spring had no more testimony to of- fer, but reas the weekly reports from the mine, covering a period of some months, and attempted thereby to show that Su- perintendent Lyman had endeavored to make the value of the ores produced tiuc- tuate. Superintendent Lyman then stated that certain conditions in the workings of the mine were res}ponsible for any and all action which he bad taken, and denied that there was aught in his action to war- rant the bringing of the charges, or to give color to the conclusions sought to be | brought by Mr. Spring from the reports read. The investigation was adjourned for one month, at which time Mr. Spring promises to produce from Virginia City witnesses to substantiate the charges which he has made. SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS. Boards of Education Must 3pecify the Kiud They Want. In answer to a letter from Samuel T. Black, Superintendent of Public Instruc- tion at Sacramento, the Attorney-General yesterday sent the following: In reply to your question, “Can it be held to be a legal sdoption (of textbooks under the rovisions of section 1874, P. C.) if the county oard of Education designates the books adopted as follows: ‘Bookkeeping, Bryant and Stratton, or any other standard work’; ‘Busi- ness Forms, any standard work,’ ‘Reading, any standard? " I am of the opinion that any such designation would not constitute a legal adop- tion, as it is the evident intent of the statute that county Boards of Education should definitely designate some particular textbooks, and that only the textbooks so designated should be used. A designation of the character above set forth is little better than no designation at all. In snswer to your further question as to whether or not the failure of the publisher whose bid is accepted to enter into the written contract provided for in subdivision 7 of sec- tion 1874 of the Political Code vitiates the adoption of the textbooks, it is my opinion thag such failure on the part of the publishers to enter into the written contract does not viti- ate the ndoPlion and that the Board of Educa-. tion accepting the bid of such publishers could enforce a compliance with the terms of the bid accepted. —————— A saunterer is believed by some ety- mologists to have originally signified a man without lands such a person natur- ally wandering to and fro in search of em- ployment. THOSE WHO WISH TO KNOW ~-THE--- GREAT SECRET OF NATURE SHOULD READ "“ELASTICITY A MOoDE. oF MoTIoN." A Dy ROBERT STEVENSON, C.E. Member of the Academy of Sciences. 50 CENTS OF ALL BOOKSELLERS. Trade supplied by the Industrial Pub- lishing Company, 40 California street, and the San Francisco News Company. THE PHYSIGIANS 'Of the Hudson Kedldal Institate Cared Mr William A Russell, Machias, Snohomish County, Wask. YOU NEED NOT DESPAIR. A Wonderful Institution, in Which Can Be Found All the Latest Electrical Appliances. T 18 THE YOUNG MEN THAT ARE BUILD- ing the far West. Itisto thé young men to whom we must look for greatimprovements. ‘We old fellows have had our building days. Young William A. Russell, brave William A. Russell, lives in Washington. He isan indus- trious, painstaking and progressive young man. - Scarcely 21 years old, ne has already achieved success in his line of work. He is now interested in one of the lumber-mills of Wash- ington. A shorttime ago he was a sick young man, Hisown letter speaks for itself: April 20, 1895. Hudson Medical Institute—Gentlemen: Your treatment is thoroughly reliable, and I ought to crave your pardon for not giving you my in- timation of the satisfactory results before thia date. Ishall be glad to recommend any of my friends who may stand in need of your treat- ment. Please accept my heartfelt thanks for the kindness you bave done me. I feel very grateful and happy-over the change, for it has much to do with my domestic happiness. I only regret that Iam not able to pay you ten times your fee or aid to bring all who need your treatment to obtain its benefits. I am frank to say that it is the greatest thing of the age, and I will be able to do you a great deal of good, which I will take great pleasure in doing. Ishall recommend the Hudson Medical Institute to all I find suffering. Yours respect. fully, WM. A. RUSSELL. AT THE INSTITUTE. What the Specialists Are Doing to Restore Health and Strength to Sufferers. It is an established rule of the Institute that no incurable diseases are taken. If an applicant is found to be suffering from true cancer or tu- bercular consumption he is frankly told that he cannot be cured, though much may be done to allay his sufferings, but as medical science has yet failed to discover any cure for these two dreadful maladies, all the physicians of | the Institute sey, freely and frankly, that it is | beyond human power to remove these evils. Nevertheless, it should not be. forgotten that there are many instances where mistakes have been made in diagnosing these diséases, soit is well for all sufferers to apply for help at the Institute. All the Following Cases Are Curable: Catarrh of the head, stomach or bladder; all bronchial diseases; all functional nervous dis- eases; St. Vitus’ dance ; hysteria; shaking palsy; ilepsy; all venereal diseases; ali kinds of blood troubles; ulcers; wastes of vital forces; | rheumatism; gout; eczema; all skin diseases, from whatever cause arising; psoriasis;all bioo oisoning; varicocele; poison oak; lost or Impaired manhood; spinal trouble; nervous exhaustion and prostration; incipient paresis; all kidney diseases; lumbago; sciatica; all bladder troubles; dyspepsia; indigestion; con- stipation; all visceral disorders, which are treated by the depurating department. Special insiruments for bladder troubles. These area few of the special diseases in which exceptionally remarkable cures have been made by the specialists, and it may frankly be stated that a helping hand is ex- tended to every patient. | Cireutars ana testimonials of the Great | Hudyan sent froe. |HUDSON MEDICAL INSTITUTE, Stockton, Market and Ellis Sts. Send for Professor J. H. Hudson’s cele~ brated lecture on ““The Errors of Youth’”’ and on “Lost Manhood.” It will cost you | nothing. Visit the institute when you can. All patients | seen in private consulting-rooms. Out-of-town patients can learn all about their cases if they send for symptom blanks. All letters are strictly confidential. Iwo thousand testi- monialsin the writing of the individuals cured. £~ Office hours, 9 A. M. to 8 P. M. Sundays, 9 to 12. NOW ON SALE AT FIRST LIST PRICES. SAN MATED HEIGHTS, The most beautiful residence portion of the City of San Mateo. LARGE AND SIGHTLY LOTS, WIDE AVENUES, PURE WATER AND PERFECT SEWERAGE. The Finest Suburban investment in This State. (. E. KNAPP & €0., Sole Agents SAN FRANCISCO OFFICES: Room 20, Seventh Floor, Mills Building. San Mateo Office, Union Hotel Building. B Y e e | QUINA-LAROGHE | FRENCH NATIONAL PRIZE of 16,600 Francs ~oe— THE GREAT French Tonic ~—— Your druggist must have it—if not, send pame and. address to E. FOUGERA & CO. 26-28 N. William St. . New York. R A Adad 4 . passsasssnanan » TDUPTURE No Truss in the world willre- tain like Dr. Pierce’s Magnetic Elastic _Truss. positively CUR ED Thesclentific manage- ._ment of Hernia a specialty. Call or write for free PAMPHLET No. 1. Ad- dress MAGNETIC TRUSS CO. (Dr. Plerce & Son), 704 Sacramento st., San_Francisco, thousands. JORPRUITR Gr. A. DANZIGIEXER ATTORNEY - AT . LA . 21 CROCKER BUILDING. DORAXAI SOAP POWDER is NOT PEDDLED, but is for sale by =l Grocers. HOUSEKEEPERS,«do not be deceived into purchasing inferior washing compounds under the impression that you are getting the latest and best. Secure an “AlD”—a 2o0-mule help for the kitchen and laundry—nof a package of Caustic Soda to ruin your clothes, your "hands and your temper. See that the famous zo-mule team is on your purchases of BOKAX, (with book of 200 best recipes in each box) 2 and. 5-Ib.:boxes, 25 and 50 cents. BORAXO Bath Powder, for Tollet and Nursery, 2 and sib. boxes, 35 and 75 cents. BOKIC Aclb' for Preserving Fish, Meats and Milk, 2 and s-Ib. boxes, 50 cents and $1.00. BORAXAID, for the Kitchen and Laundry, 1 and ‘3-Ib. packages, 10 and 25 cents.