The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, October 5, 1895, Page 11

THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, SATURDAY, GCTOBER 5, 1895. PASTOR GIBSON A Wi The Handwriting of the| Minister Put in Evidence. 2AUINLAN'S CHARACTER. The Witnesses From Sonoma County Corroborate Bar- clay Henley. URRANT'S GOOD REPUTATION. Question Miss Cunningham Refused to Answer Taken Under Advisement. ANT TRIAL IN A MINUTE—PAS- TOR GIBSON A WITNESS, Theodore Durrant for the mur- 1t was adjonrned last lar interesting event of yesterday t of Rev.John George Gibson, 1l Church, on the witness- stimony, however, was not at ail sEiih d was confined to the identifi- ns of his own hend- itted to him by the de- said, very like his own chiro- t be would swear positively to none iey had been out of his pos- They were, however, e. n of Mr, Barnes, witness wrote er, which was 0 admitted in evi- written before and 1y of April 3, were also Carrie Cunningham, the no refused to tell from her information for tne eak, Judge Murphy said he was nota proper one, but ke it under advisement until Spaps e called to testify that Martin | utation in Sonoma County wes ses came to say that the reputa- Durrant till the time of his THE TWENTY-FIRST DAY. Pastor Gibson Comes to the Stand. Many Witnesses As to Repu- tations—A Busy Day. bod deal of headway was made yes- in the Durrant trial. The defense reached that stagze where witnesses me to the stand to say that Durrant’s ter, or reputation, haps, was very up to the time of hisarrest. This would seem to indicate that the case for the defense is quite near the close. About all the points of proof offered by Deuprey in his opening statement have °n made, and it remains now only for the defendant himself to take the stand and tell his version of the events of the fternocon of April 3. Monday being a liday there will be no session of Tuesday next. Then, it is 1 be sworn as a wit- little newspaper z to go to jail rather may not go to jail about come to the stion insisted upon on is not a proper one under evidence, and has, at any n the ter under advisement. ent of the day, after Miss Cun- 's fate was disposed of, was the ng of Rev. John George Gibson to the s chair. His advent created some excitement in the courtroom, but his tes- ny proved to be entirely without sen- was called merely to identify speci- mens of his own handwriting. He declined to do this in a positive manner. The ng was “‘very like’’ his, he said, but t had been out of his possession for time he could not swear toit. At Mr. Barnes’ dictation he wrote a leiter, hich was submitted asevidence. Two ‘mons of his were also introduced. Two other points were covered by the lefense during the day. The first was as the credibility of Martin J. Quinlan, the itness who testified to seeing Durrant and Blanche Lamont walking on Bartlett street toward the church. Several wit- esses, headed by Barclsy Heniey, swore t when Mr. Quinlan lived in Sonoma County, some years ago, his reputation for truth and integrity was bad. Then came the witnesses to the good reputation of Durrant. These were Albert H. Martin, A. M. Davis, James McCul- lough, John H. Sievers, Rev. J. C.Smith, B. R. Keith, Alexander H. McDonald, Donald Mackintosh, George H. Freier- muth, Dr. W. Z. King, J. A. McCullough and H. Porter. Of course, the introduction of this testi- mony paves the way for the prosecution to show that Durrant’s life was not all that it is thought to have been by these witnesses, if it can, and Mr. Barnes says he will make the most of his opportunity. With what due importance the defense clothes the testimony of Mrs. Leak, who says she saw Theodore Durrant and Blanche Lamont enter Emmannel Church together, 1s apparent from the determined effort Mr. Dickinson is making for even remote information that may lead to some- thing upon which Mrs. Leak may be im- peached. This is admittedly the purpose of the defense in pressing the question that Miss Cunningham says she will not answer, all the jails in Christendom to the contrary, notwithstanding. Miss Cunningham has already said that she did not obta'n the information for her article from Mrs. Leak—which was a sur- prise to the defense. Upon cross-exami- nation Mr. Dickinson asked Mrs. Leak if she had held a conversation with Miss Cunninghem. And when Mrs, Leak de- nied it, the defense felt that it had laid the foundation for herimpeachment. They bad Miss Cunningham’s article in view. Now, it isquite possible that Miss Can- ham’s information came from a source foreign to Mrs. Leak and un- wn to her. ‘But, argues the defense, if ss Cunningbham got her information m, say a neighbor in the vicinity, we y be able to show that the neighbor got his or her information from Mrs. Leak, or from another neighbor who heard it from neighbor who got it directly from a ighbor who received the information rom Mrs. Leak’s lips. Even Mr. Diekinson does not deny that is a fishing expedition, but by casting his line over such a wide extent of sea, and baiting it with remote, possibilities, he 2ht, perchance, catch a elew that would lead up to information showing that Mrs, Leak had spoken about her testimony td’ TNESS FOR DURRANT, some other person aside from those named by the lady. Juage Murphy has already said that he does not consider such a course competent under the rules, —— THE MORNING SESSION. Miss Cunningham Does Not Go to Jail—Pastor Glbson Identifies His Handwriting. “Call Miss Cunningham,” said Judge Murphy, when court convened in the morning. There was a moment’s waiting; then a small woman walked demurely down the aisle to the witness-stand beside Judge Murphy. The court—I understand, that the question asked you as follows: “From whom, then, did you obtain the information?’ Iunderstand that you re- fuse to answer the question ? Witness—Yes, sir. u;'lhe court—Do you still insist upon the ques- 17 Mr. Dickinson—Yes, sir. The court—I think it very doubtful that the question is proper, but I determined last even- ing to be saie and erron the side of the defense. if at all. Now, I have given this matter very serious consideration. Iam bound to give this defend- ant the full benefit of every gosslble point th can throw liihx upon the subject of this inves- tigation,butl am almostsettled in the oninion that this question is improper, I want to commit no error, if possible. This Iady anchors herself upon what she thinksis her right under the law. Now the power of the court to punish for contempt is no ar- bitrary power. i she be right in her position the court has no power to compel her to answer. In the case of ex parte Zehandler, reported in 71 Callfornia, the coust impris: oned a newspaper reporter for refusing to divulge his information as to an article he had Miss Cunningham, last evening was ~ ‘‘Have you anyrecollection of having writ- ten is?” “No special recoliection. It looks very like my writing.” Dialogues like this occurred with each specimen of handwriting exhibited to the witness. Mr. Gibson remarked repeatedly that as the specimen had not remained in his possession he could not swear but that someone else had written them in imita- tion of his own hand. Nevertheless all the specimens were of- {fered in evidence as exaniples of the hand- writing of the witness—the contents of the papers not to be taken into consideration. ‘Witness was shown his own signature on a small piece of paper, but he would not wdentify it any more positively than the other specimens, He was then shown a small piece of per with “George R. King' on it. He said that it looked very much as if he had writ- ten it. Then another slip with ‘“Professor Schwerenstein” on it. The answer was the same. “Did you not write these three names dur(us your examination at the Police Court?”’ aske Dickinson, showing the witness three other slips of paper with the same names written in leadpencil. ‘‘I recollect writing the names inink, but not those in leadpencil.” Mr. Barnes—The question has been answered, but I would llke the record to show and the witness to know that he was not examined in the Poljce Court in this case. Mr. Dickinson—I was not aware of that. Mr. Barnes (pointing to where Attorney Morn- teith sat)—I would like to ask if Mr. Monteith is to be called as a witness. Isee him in the courtroom. Mr. Dickinson—He will not be a witness, Barnes—What kind of a pen do you use, Dr. Gibson ? ““A Waverly pen.” “Have you one with you " “Yes, sir.” ‘‘Please sit at the clerk's desk, here, and write from my dictation.” | Witness did as requested and wrote from the following dictation: “8AN FRANCI2CO, October 4, 1895. “My Dear Ki I have just had a con- | versation with Professor Schwerenstein. He ! informed me that he has just visited the resi- know the reputation of ‘Mr.Quinlan, or it he did it had slipped his mind. K L. J. Hall of Sonoma County did not know Martin J. Quinlan, but had heard of him. What he heard was not to Quinlan’s credit, but that was a long time ago. A. D. Loughlin, a Sonoma County at- torney, said that Quinlan’s reputation was bad. % ‘W. C. Kellog, a newspaper reporter, once the editor of a paper'in Santa Roga, had heard Quinlan spoken of in a way reflect- ing on the latter's reputation. The Rev. Mr. Gibson came back to the stand at this point. He bronght with him two sermons, one written in March and the other in September last. The one written before the tragedy was written by the left hand. Witness was shown the blackboard taken from the pastor’s study in the church and introducas by the defense. He said the writing on it was in main very like his own. t%Bia would not swear to the hand- writing, however, and there were some letters on it that were unlike his and some of the others were badly blurred. ‘Witness was further shown a slip of aper that was taken from the church Ebrary and asked if he had written it. it seemed to be in his handwriting, he said, but beyond that he would not depose. Then came the witnesses to prove the good character of the defendant. P.D. Code was the first of these. He had known Durrant for several years, and bad attended the same church. “Durrant’s reputation for truth and integrity and for eace and quiet was good, he said. He Ead not heard it discussed. Albert H. Martin, manager of the Golden Rule Bazaar, said he had known Durrant for seven or eight years, that Durrant had worked at the bazaar and that his reputa- tion was good. He had not beard it dis- cussed, but he kept a pretty close account of his employes. A. M. Davis was sworn. He said he was personally acquainted with Durrant, who had worked for him during the holi- days and at the fire sale at the bazaar. He never heard Durrant’s character discussed, but his reputation was good. REV. J. GEORGE written. He sued out a writ of habeas co-pus and the Supreme Court released him, holding that the Superior Court Judge was Wrong in imprisoning the witness, because the question that the witness refused to answer was not-per- tinent to the issue. Now, it is a serious matter to deprive a per- son of his liberty, yet the court undoubtedly has the right to enforce its rulings upon an obstinate witness by sending the witness to jail until the question is answered. This ques- tion can, of course, be only admissible for the urpose of impeaching the witness, Mrs. Leak. Kow, how canit be suid. that this contradicts or impesches her? On the contrary, Miss Cun- mngham’s testimony rather corroborates that of Mrs. Lesk. 1 am led almost irresistibly to the conclusion that the question is not proper. I will, however, hold the matter in abeyance, and in the meantime if there be any plausivle theory upon which it can be srgued that the nestio “ent it to me. AS the mAtter NOW impresses me I could not allow it, and I feel thatIam not straining a point in taking the matter un- der advisement. Mr. Dickinson—Until when, your Honor? The court—Until Monday or Tuesday. 1 be- lieve Monday is a holiday. Mr. Dickinson—I understand your Honor's remarks to mean that the question is only ad- missable as impea¢hing Mrs. Leak. sk testified quite In extenco the manmer in which her information was imparted to the prosecu- tion. Now, might it not be that we can prove through this witness that she had spoken to another person or to others than those she named. Burely that would lay the proper rounds for impeachment. "Though this is in fhe nature of & fshing expedition, I hold that it 13 & proper one under the circumstances, and that to uphold the witness in withholding the informatlon would be to give it the character of & privileged communication. Thz counz-You have the fact that Mrs, Leak made disclosures concerning her testimony to two persons—her daughter and to Mrs. Henry. You have a right to eall anybody else to show that she also spoke to them. I know of no rule of the court that woula admit as proper such a question as this, where the witness has already said she had no communieation with Mrs. Leak, the witness sought to be impeached. If there is such a rule I hope counsel will point it out. I shall postpone a rulingon the case till Tuesday morning. Mr. Dickinson—We take exception to the ruling of the court. The court—But there has been no ruling yet. Mr. Dickinson—Then we desire an exception to the action of the court. The court—You are entitled to that. Call the next witness. F. A. Sademan, who was janitor of Em- manuel Church between October, 1894, and the latter part of April of this year, was recalled. Z = : Mr. Dickinson questioned him consider- ably concerning the ventilation of the church. Witness gaid he opened the wi dows and belfry door to get proper ventila- tion. “‘When was the last occasion prior to April 3 that you 1it the gas in the church?” asked Mr. Barnés upon cross-examination. “The Sunday evening before.” Arthur Carroll, who has been janitor f the church since July last, was sworn. ;Ie testified that he opened the windows for_ventilation. Since bis incumbency he had never been upstairs between the ceil- ings, and_knew of nobody who had. He had not disturbed the ventilators. He re- ceived his keys from C, W. Taber. Stephen Beverley Nourse, another of the senior class medical students, was sworn. e said he did not answer for Durrant at the rollcall of Dr.Cheney's lecture. His notes of the lecture were offéred in evi- dence. £ Then came the Rev. John George Gib- son, and a sensation was expected, but did not materialize. His exsmination was confined to the identification of numerous specimens of his own handwriting. None of these would be identify positively, because the papers bad not been in his possession. “Well, what is your best recollection?’ per- sted Mr. Dickinson again and agein. “It looks very like i, would be the answer. n is admissible, I hope counsel will pre- | GIBSON GIVES SPECIMENS OF HIS [Sketched by a “ Call” artist.] HANDWWRITING. dence of Mrs. Charles G. Noble, 209 21at st. (put the number and the street 1n figures). “Yours truly, J. GEORGE GIBSON. “Below write: - “Mrs. Noble, 209 (in fignres) 21st st. (in figures) street (abbreviated), Ci When the writing was finished Mr. | Barnes offered the paper in- evidence as “*people’s exhibit 51 on cross-examination of Dr. Gibson.” “Havé you any sermon or long writing of your own ihat you know to be your own?” asked Mr. Barnes. ay, es, sir. “Will you bring them into _eourt this after- noon?” “Why, of course.” The court—Better bring specimens of your writing that were written both before and after April 1nst. “Yes, &fr.” Mr. Dickinson then asked witness to write Mrs. M. N." Noble, printing the ini- tials and putting a capital B in the Noble. There was some misunderstanding as to the meaning of this on the part of the wit- ness, but it was finally explained to him that he must follow the instructions and write the name in the manner wanted— with the capital B in the middle of the Noble. When this was done Mr. Dickinson asked witness if he had in his possession the specimens of his handwriting that were pictured in the newspapers? Witness inquired which publication ? The date was fixed by Mr. Dickinson as last Saturday, and witness was instructed to bring those specimens into court in the | aftérnoon, if he could find them. L. L. Levings, a newspaper reporter, was called to identify a published interview with Detective Gibson, in which reference ‘was made to footprints in the belfry. Mr. Levings could notidentify the articles as his own, nor could he give any clew as to its authorship beyond enumerating the men who worked on the case at that time. Then the noon recess was taken. e THE AFTERNOON SESSION. Witnesses Testlfy tothe Good Repu- tation Borne by Durrant—Mar- tin J. Quinlan’s Reputation. In the afternoon there came several Wwitnesses who said that Martin J. Quin- lan’s reputation for integrity and veracity in Sonoma County some years ago was not good. The first of these was Barclay Henley, the ex-Congressman and attorney. He said he had known Martin Quinlan for about fifteen years and had lived among his neighbors in Sonoma County. Quin- lan’s reputation was bad, he said. Upon cross-examination witness said that Quinlan’s reputation had not been discussed very much. He rememberea that A. Fitzpatrick, a client of his, had re- cently said that Quinlan’s reputation was bad. Reel Terry had also remarked to witnleu that Quinlan’s reputation was not good. “Would you believe Martin J. Quinlan under oath?”’ asked Mr. Deuprey. “Iwouldn't like to #ay 8s to that. A witness credibility is largely governed by his intereat in the matter.” The court—Were the remarks you heard about Quinlan with reference to his honesty? “No, 8ir; not as to his honesty.” Ransome Powell was the next witness, He is a resident of Sonoma County. He and thereabouts was bad. Upon cross-examination witness said he had a friend who was once in litigation with Quinlan. W. A. Reed of Sonoma County did not. said Quinlan's reputation at Banta Rosa | | . James McCullough said he had known | Durrant eight or nine years and that his | reputation was good. He had never heard | it discussed prior to the 8th of April. John H. Sievers had known Durrant for many years, and had heard his reputation discussed about once a month for a period of ten years, beginning when Durrant was at school. Judge Murphy inquired what was the cause of Durrant's character being discussed so often, but witness did not know. Rev. J. Cumming Smith knew Durrant seven or eight years and knew that his reputation was good. He had never heard it discussed. B. R. Keith had known Durrant for fifteen years and knew that his reputation was good, though he had not heard it dis- cussed. 8 Alexander H. McDonald, who knew Durrant several vears, had heard it said that he was a ‘‘nice, moral young man.” He knew that Durrant’s character was good. Donald Mackingosh is a neighbor of the Durrant family. After testifying to the %ood character of the defendant Mr. arnes asked him if his wife had not accompanied Durrant to the Cooper Medi- cal Coliege upon one occasion. Witness replied in the affirmative. ““Did not Mrs. Mackintosh make a statement to you concerning that occasion ?”” ‘1'1 do not recall that she did. Not in parti- cular.” “Didn’t she make a remark about something that heppened then?” “I think not.” Mr. Barnes then asked that the court in- struct the witness to hold himself in readi- ness }u be summoned as a witness for the eople. .Then Mr. Dickinson elicited the addi- tional information that Mrs. Mackintosh’s trip to the college with Durrant was dar- ing a visit to that institution of a conven- tion of physicians and surgeons. George H. Freiermuth said he had known Durrant for several years, that his reputa- tion was good, and that about four years ago he hn§ heard it discussed with credit to Durrant, ' Dr. W. Z. King, father of George R. King, the organist of Emmanuel Church, said the reputation of Durrant was good. His family was intimate with the Durrant family. e had never heard Durrant's reputation discussed. J. A. McCullough said he was a brother | of Draughtsman McCullouzh, who drew | the diagrams_in the case for the defense. | He was very intimate with Durrant, but had not subscribed any money for the de- fense. He saia Durrant’s character was good, but he never heard it discussed. H. Porter, an old schoolmate of Dur- rant, said he had heard the defendant’s reputaticn discussed at the college, and that it was always spoken of with credit to Durrant. . M. Vogel, the husband of Mary Vogel, who testified for the people that she saw Durrant in front of the Normal School waiting for Blanche Lamont, was the last witness for the week. , Mr. Deuprey asked him what newspapers he took. He subscribed for Tue CAry, he said Vogel were very busy and read the papers but casually. "At night, aiter supper, he usually went straight to « for he must be up at 3 o’clock in the morning, On Sunday he sometimes went fishing, or went tothe park with his wife. She bad her housework to do, and found but scant time to read. “How long has Mrs. Vogel been wearing glasses?” suddenly asked Mr, Deuprey. y and on Sunday bought all the papers. He did not, hewever, he said, very em vely, have much time to:read anything more | than the headlines. Both he and Mrs. “She has never used glasses, that 1 know of.” “Isn’y her eyesight bad?"” e “Ivslvery good.” : “Did you have an interview with a man named Green in front of your residence on the 27th of September?” “Not that I know of?” Mr. Deuprey then described Mr. Green in detail and witness said he did remember talking to such a. person. “Didn’t you 38y to him that you bought all the papers?” *No, sir.” “Didn’t you tell him that both you and your wife read all the testimony in’the Durrant trial very clossly?” “I never said any such a thing at all.” There were no more witnesses in attend- ance, and the court ad journed till Tuesday morning. —_—— STILL AFTER DR. GIBSON. Durrant’s Attorneys Seeking Cast Further Suspicion Upon Him. The attorneys for Durrant are deter- mined, if possible, to compel Miss Carrie Cunningham, the Chronicle reporter, to divulge the secret of the source from which she obtained the information from which the story of ‘Mrs. Leak and the testimony she would give, was written ana published. 1t is the theory of the defense that although the story is aceredited to the police, it was in reality furnished by Rev. J. George Gibson. Durrant’s attorneys will therefore make a most strenuous effort to carry their to 'point and compel the lady to tell where she got her information. Then, should they succeed, and she should say, as the defense believes she will if she speak at all, that the story was given her by Rev. J. Georgze Gibson, the implications that have already been made against that gentleman will be as nothing compared to what the defense will seek to imply. For if they develop the fact that Dr. Gibson gave out the story they will advance by implication the theory that he prevailed upon Mrs. Leak to .believe she saw Durrant and Blanche Lamont enter the church yard together. Dr. Gibson has repeatedly denied that he had any. connection with the story. From his mannet he is apparently little concerned as to any unpleasantness that may arise from implications drawn from anything Miss Cunningham may tell. ‘There was a matter of singular interest in connection with 'the afternoon proceed- ings of the Durrant trial yesterday. It was during the taking of testimony to im- peach the evidence of Martin Quinlan that a4 number of witnesses from Sonoma County were called to testify concernin his character. Among them was Al Reed, who took his place on the witness-stand and-in response to the questions of Gen- eral Dickinson gave Quinlan a very bad character. The singular interest attaching to the incident 1s that Reed, in company with John Bailiff, walked into_the law offize of James Noon at. Santa Rosa one day in 1886 and killed him for Tving betrayed Bailiff’s wife, who is Réed’s sister, and Noon was the friend and intimate asso- ciate of Quinlan when the latter was a resident of Santa Rosa. Reed and Bailiff were tried for the killing of Noon, and speedily acquitted on the ground that it was justifiable. THE B NAI BRITH SCHOOL Fire Wardens Say It Must Not Be Held in the Eddy-street Building. Jtis Clalmed That Economlical Mem- bers Desire the School Abolished. Some discussion has been aroused among the members of the Independent Order of B’'nai B'rith by the action of the Board of Fire Wardens in this City. The order -possessed, until recently, a school for imparting a general course of secular and religious 1nstruction to Jewish chil- dren whose parents are not members of any synagogue, and who are, therefore, not entitled to tuition at the ordinary Sabbath-schools. The school was held in the basement of the B'nai B'rith Hall on Eddy street. The Board of Fire Wardens recently reported that this building is unfit for use as a school. It was asserted, and it is not de- nied, that there is but one exit and that dark, narrow and inconvenient. In case of a panic the position of the 250 children attending the school endeavoring to get into the street by means of one stairway would be extremely perilous. The pupils of the school have been re- moved to a building on Mission street pending some action on the part of the committee. It is, however, charged on the part of some prominent members of the order that there exists a clique which is anxious to do away with the school on the score of economy. This would be a savin of §250 per annum. It is openly slal,eg that these members have used their in- fluence with the fire officials to get the building on Eddy street condemned as a pre{’iminary to abolishing the school alto- ether. g In the interim prominent members in B'nai Brith have not been idle. Dr. Jacob Voorsanger has addressed the fol- lowing letter to.a number of gentlemen in- terested in the question: SAN FrANCISCO, October, 1895, Dear Sir and_Brother: In my opinion the time has arrived for & more general dissemina- tion of the principles of Judaism in San Fran- cisco. esreollll{ among tne children of our community. We are once more practically without & s¢hool which may be atiended by the children of our co-religionists whose con- tracted means prevent them from becoming members of congragations. It is indisputable that we owe that class some consideration. The recént action of the hall directors of tho | B."B. Hall has grmtluflfly given the death- blow to the school, for some years in charge of the B'nai B'rith order. We must begin anew, under more general auspices, to found a per- manent school of religion for the poor in our midst. With that object in view I address this communication to you &s one of acommittee of thirty-six gentlemen whom I have invited for a general discuseion of the subject. I trust you will honor me with your attendance on next Monday evening, October 7, at 8 o'clock, at the vestry-room of the Temple Emanu-EL Fraternally and respectfully yours, JAcOB VOORSANGER. It is expected that after the meetin, mentioned has been held some practical result will be arrived at, —————— ‘Rival Window-Cleaners, The men who go about downtown with pails and bamboo ladders cleaning plate-glass win- dows are at present engaged in a vendetta worthy of the Tennessee Mountains. How it will end no man foresees, but the industry just now suggests the flowirg of more blood than window-washing water. One organiza- tion 18 German, the other Italian, and war to the knife is threatened. A manifesto sent out yesterday by one of the rivals adyises‘‘all good Citizens to beweare aud give the Mafia window- cleaners and stiletto-wielders a wide berth and tender your patronage to the only reputable gentiemen in this business with unblemished characters.” The literary bureau of its rival asserts in blood-curdling language that its competitors form “a conglomerated aggrega- tion of uncongenisl, unreliable and unkempt ‘personifications of humanity,” and calls on he public to distinguish “beiween skilled and amateur manipulators in the art of window- polishing. B = ‘Feast of St. Francis. ‘The feast of Bt. Francis of Assisium was solemnly celebrated yesterday in St. Anthony’s Chaurch, Army and Valencia streets. The cele- brant, deacon and.sub-deacon of the mass were Dominican fathers. Father T. Caraher, Mis- sion San Jose, preached the panegyric of the saint in English, and Father Mueiler, 8. J., in German. 2 Dr. Lilienthal’s Will. Dr. James E. Lilienthal, who died on Septem- ber 27,left 8 $35,000 estate. By a will filed esterday the property is bequeathed to Albert Alieathal of New York and Philip N. Lilien- thal; Jesse W. Liienthal and Ernest R. Lilien- thal of thia City, JOHN W, ACKAY 5 SUE Made a Defendant in EI Dorado County Mining Litigation. A CONSPIRACY IS CHARGED. Joel T. Smith, John D. Bancroft and Robert M. Green Ask Heavy Daméges. John W, Mackay was made a defendant in a $200,000 mining suit, involving a valu- able group of mines in El Dorado County, that was filed in the United States Circuit Court yesterday. No service of the papers in the case has been had and the complaint has not as yet been made a part of the record of the court. The plaintiffs are Joel T.Smith, a min- ing man from Montana, John D. Bancroft and Robert M. Green, and the defendants Edward Bind, Leonard Reeg, A. Head, John W. Mackay, John Doe and Richard Roe. The complaint seis forth that on May 20, 1895, Smith made an agreement with the defendants Bind and Reee to buya number of mines for $60,000. The proper- tes included were the Blue Gouge, Flem- ing Extension, Procop, Roeky Point, West and Park, all in the Pleasant Valley min- ing district. A half interest in the Bo- nanza mine and the water rights belonging to the entire group were included in the parchase. Smith was to pay $1000 on July 5, 1895, $11,500 on August 1, 1895, §7500 on September 1, 1895, $10,000 on October 1, 1895, $10,000 on November 1, 1895, and $20,000 on January 1, 1896, and to take pos- session at once, all proceeds from the operation of the properties to be applied to the purchase price. It was also stipulated that the agreement to sell should be dependent upon a bond executed on May 6, 1895, by defendants Reeg and Bind agreeing to sell the prop- erties to plaintiff Bancroft for $55,000, $30,000 of which was to be paid before July 1, 1865, and $25,000 on or before September 1, 1895. Later the original agreement was modified to allow Smith to pay $1000down, $15,000 on September 1, $22,0000n December 1 and $22,000 on March 1, 1896. Then Smith took Bancroft and Green into the deal as equal partners and a pur- chaser for the entire group was looked for. In the meantime a verbai extension of the time for making the payments was ob- tained from Bind ana Reeg. Negotiations were opened with a num- ber of capitalists looking for investments, and John W. Mackay was finally ap- proached and offered the group for $250,000 cash. He employed experts to go over the property, including the defendant, Head. The complaint goes on to say thaton September 15 the experts visited the claims on which the plaintiffs had already ex- pended allarge amount of money in de- velopments, and spent several days in ex- amining them. ‘While there, the plaintiffs claim, the de- fendants conspired to negotiate a sale of the mines, ignoring those who had bonded them, and entered into an agreement by which the properties were to be transferred to Mackay, through his agents, for a sum several thousand dollars less than the price originally asked Mackay by the plamtiffs. his arrangement_is said to be on the eve of consummation, and the court is asked to grant an injunction preventing Reeg and Bind from selling the mines to Mackay and compelling the latter to cease negotiations. The plaintiffs claim that through the ac- tions of the defendants in refusing to keep to the orginal agreement they have been injured In the sum of $200,000 and judg- ment is asked for that amount. Defendant Mackay is said to be at'the mines, which are considered among the most promising in El Dorado County. 'W. 8. Scott is attorney for the plaintiffs and will be assisted by H. N.and R. P. Clement as counsel. JUDGE BELCHER'S WILL, Disposal of the Eminent Lawyer's Es- tate, Which Is Valued at $100,000. Ex-Judge William C. Belcher, who died in this City on September 1, owned an estate that is valued at $100,000. His will was filed last Tuesday at Marysville. I. S. Belcher and John H. Jewett are nominated executors, and to these is be- queathed nearly all the property, to be beld in trust for the following purposes: To close up all the business of the estate; to ay to the testator’s aunt, Pheebe W. Brooks, gmm a year; to pay his sister, Mary J. Belcher, $50 & month as lon%‘ as she lives: to pay his sister, Charlotte M. Whitney, $600 a year for the education of ber nephew, William B. Whit. ney: to pay the expenses ot tha education of his ‘niece, Ann Belcher, at Wellesley or any otner college, provided’ that such expenses shall not exceed $600 a year; to pay to Ann Belcier, at the completioa of her education, $8000; to Alice Belcher and Mattie Belcher, nieces, #8000 cach; to pay to Willlam B, Whitney, at the completion of his eduecation, 8000: to Edward Belcher, another nephev, $3000; to Mamie and Bessie Rogers, nieges, 000 each; to pay the income of $10,000 to the testator’s sister, Charlotte; to pay Minnie A.and Hattie Taggart, $5000 each. The Marysville library is to receive $1000 and the Gaysville (Vt.) library books and $10,000. -I. S. Belcher, a brother, is to hold the testator’s interest in the family homestead at Stockbridge, Vt., for a sister and her husband. The residue of the es- tate will go to the University of Vermont for the purchase of books. —————— California Quartet at St. John’s. The well-known California Quartet will sing at St. John’s Presbyterian Church to- morrow . morning. The quartet has been engaged for services in that church for the ensuing six months. It will doubtless prove an attractive feature of that popular place of worship. BACKACHE. From the Press, New York City. Few people have suffered more from pain in the back than Mrs. Lillle B. Newell of No. 2313 Second avenue, New York City. For several years she was so_afllicted with this dis- tressing malady that she was hardly able to get eround, and could do little to care for her children, which made her suffering all the harder to bear. Her husband, Charles New- ell, who is a well-known New York optician, tried in every wnf to find & remedy for his wife, but no medicine seemed to have the PoOWer to remove her pain. Mrs. Glynn, a sister of Mrs. Newell, ig & pro- fessional nurse, and was familiar with the symptoms of her sister’s sickness. Mrs, New- ell was away on & visit when a reporter called upon her, but Mrs. Glynn, who lives at No. 416 East One Hundred and Twentieth street, told the story of her sister’s recovery. A doctor was called when Mrs. Newell’s con- dition beeame serions and he preseribed small pink pills, which, in a short time, relieved the WOman's pain as no other medicine had done. “After a while,”” Mra. Glynn told the reporter, “‘wé learned that the medicine the physician was, {{ving my sister was nothing more than Dr. Williams” 'Pink Pills for Pale People. Knowing by experience how excellent a reme- dy these pills were, Mrs. Newell bonght some at a drugstore and continued taking' them. The effect was most gratifying, for in six months my sister was perfectly well, and *the pain in her back was nothing more thsn an unpleasant memory. Both she and I have recommended the Pink Pills to other people, who have not failed to find them all that is claimed. All the doctors my sister had been treated by, before taking the pills; had done her no apparent good.” A Pink Pills are sold in boxes (never in loose form, by the dozen or hundred, and the public is cautioned dgainst numerous imitations g‘old in this shape) at 50 cents a box, or six oxes for§2 50, and may be had of ali drug- ggu or direct by mail from Dr, Williams’ edicine Company, Schenectady, N. Y. The lprlce at which these pills are sold makes & course of treatment inexpensive as co; red Wwith other remedies or map;xul treatment Children To=Day We are going to surprise you. We have offered many astonishing Bargains in Chil- dren’s Clothing, but TO-DAY is the day of days; TO-DAY we snall outdo all for- mer efforts. $3.50. A new line, just opened, of Reafer suits, in blue, brown and gray, with wide braded collar. Handsome: something any boy will be proud of. $1.50. Short pants suits, double- breasted, neat plaids. We were astonished that we could sell them for that, and.you will be too. $5.00.. New Fall patterns in Boys’ Overcoats, handsome and dura- ble, worth $7 50. You must see these to appreciate them— see them in the Broad Daylight in our store. Everything as light as if it were outdoors. H. ROMAN & €0, The New Daylight Store, COR. HARKET AND FIFTH STREETS, Open To-night till 11 P. . A GREAT PAPER. TO=-DAY’S News Letter. It’s as good as the play to read ‘“‘Pleasure’s Wand.” The incisiveness of the editorials and the vigorous manner events are dealt with will please you. Every department is brimming over with delightiul personalities. Take a copy home and make your wife, your sweetheart and yourself happy. FOR A DIME. BROOKS KUMYS Has many imitators—no equals. Made from pure Jersey Farm milk And cream only. Contains 25 per cent More nutriment than any other. Will cure indigestion and stomach Allments. HOMEOPATAIC PHARMACY, 119 POWELL STREET. The powers that Le are the powers of Hudyan A purelv vegetable preparation, it stops all_losse cures Prematureness, MANROOD, Const pation, Dizziness, Failing Sensations, Nervous "'witching of the Eyes and other paris. Strengthens, invigorates and (ones tne entire system.. It is s cheap a8 any other remedy. HUDYAN cures Debility, Nervousness, Emls- ores weak organs: pains in the back,loascs by day ot night stopped quiekly. Over 2000 private Indorsements. Prematureness means impotency in the first stage. It is a symptom of seminal weakness and barrenness. It can be stopped in twenty days by the use of Hudyan. Hudyan costs no more than any other remedy. ‘Send for circulars and testimontals. Blood diseases can be cured. Don't you goto hot springs before you read our *Blood Book.” Send for this book. It Is free. HUDSON MEDICAL INSTITUTE, Stockton, Market and Ellis Sts., San Francisco, Cal. LI PO TAI JR., Chinese Tea and Herh Sanitorinm, No. 727 Washinglon St., San Francisco, Cal. Cor. Brenham Place, above the piaza. Office Hours: 9 to 12, 1to4and5to7. Sun- day, 9 A. M. to 12 M. —— Li Po Tai Jr., son of the famous Li Po Tai, has taken his father’s business, anad is, afier eleven years’ study in China, fully prepared to locate and treat all diseases. GEORGE H. FULLER DESK CO, BT Isthe Placeto Buy _ | DESKS, CHAIRS And All Kinds of OFFICE FURNITURE i 638-640 Misslon St. NEW WESTERN HOTEL. KEARNY AND WASHINGTON STS.—RE- o modeled mdnm-ug'.” KING, gzu% % uropean plan, Rooms [ 1088 per week, $8 10 850 por month: froe baibes hot and cold water every roowm; fire grates | Toom; elevator runs all night