The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, October 23, 1895, Page 10

10 THE SAN FRANCISCO CALL, WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 23, 1895. A -r. HosE. & F-GLASER THE CHIEF REBUTTAL WITNESSES / ST puting Gan 7 Z Fpor- Frree WHO TESTIFIED IN THE DURRANT TRIAL YESTERDAY. 7 C-WweDoOGE . DURRANT ASKED DR, GRAHAM FOR HIS NOTES, - TO THE REBUTTAL BEGUN. DR. GLASER D HIs NOTES TO OF APRIL. PROFESSOR PRICE TESTIFIES. CoMmposITION OF BROMO SELTZER AND THE EFFECTS OF Gas INEALATION. DURRANT TRIAL IN DAMAGING PRISONE The case ot Theodore Durrant, cherged with the murder of Bianche Lamont, was closed yes- terday morning, and before night some damag- ing testimony in rebuttal had been submitted. A MINUTE — SOME Y E Glaser, a classmate of Durrant, testified that April 10 he and Durrant went into one of therooms of the college and he read the notes he hed taken of Dr. Cheney’s lecture— the lecture delivered on April 3. at which Dur- rant claims he was present. Durrant, he said, wrote & good deal of what was read in his note- book. J. S. Dunnigan, & newspaper man, told how he had visited Durrant in prisonin the of Dr. Gilbert tostep aside for a moment while talked together. Then ae conversation Durrant 1at he had no notes of Dr. ed whether he would f them might be made. tion oceurred on April 20. Professor Thomas Price, a chemist, was ealled to tell of some stains he had examined. He said the stain on the pastor's shoe was a grease spot, but he was not allowed to testify further in that direction. He was asked about gasand its effects, and in answer o a hypo- thetical ) detailing the circumstances under which Durrant seid he fixed the sun- burner, Price said that no man could live in the atmosphere Durrant describes. In the morning the five trustees were called to tell that they had never asked Durrant to fix the sunburners, and Adolph Hobe described how he had at the ferries on ing to & young lady. This was on the afternoon of the day as was killed. ‘two other stu- i , testified to seeing Durra * on the same afternoon, on and J. P. Cooper, re- Char, J. porters, were called to tell of statements about his move- Durrant had made o them ments on April 3. Mr. Barnes says the case in rebuttal will close to-day. e THE MORNING SESSION. The Defense Rests—A Witness Who Saw Durrant With a Girl at the Ferry on April 12. The defense in the Durrant case has closed. The promises made by Mr. Deu- prey, when he made his opening addres: to the § , have been fulfilled so far as the defense has been capable of fu ing them, and all possible has been said and done to establish the innocence of the defendant and to counteract the fearful weight of the | by the police and | It was just | testimony gathered driven home by Mr. Barnes. after the court opened that Dickinson an- nounced the end of his evidence, and before the morning session was an hour old the prosecution had well started its case in re- buttal. On opening court Judge Murphy at once took up the subject of the strap which had been sent through the mail to General Dickinson en July 29,and which he offered | in eviaence on Monday. This strap, his Honor =aid, had certain earmarks on it, among others. the name of Blanche La- mont, but that it was only imperfectly identified by Maud Lamont. There was nothing to fully identify the painting on the strap as the work of Blanche Lamont. Ordinarily speaking, his Honor said, when evidence is offered in a case, there must be some evidence to connectit with the par- ties in the case. The question then remains as to whether or not the vague identification of the strap by Miss Maud Lamont was sufficient. The court announced that he had gravedoubts as to the advisability of admitting the | strap, but a general rule, which his Honor said he follows, is to err rather on the side of the defendant than against him, and in pursuance of this he would admit the strap. Dickinson wanted, however, to submit the strap, the newspaper which inclosed it and_a little piece of paper which accom- panied it. Mr. Barnes objected to each submission, but the erd of it was that the strap wasadmitted as evidence, the paper containing the address was admitted as a sample of handwriting to be compared with other samples already admitted and the small piece of paper was ruled out alto- gether. This was the defense. The witness which General Dickinson thought he was going to put on_the stand was not forth- coming, and with the admission of the bookstrap bearing the name of the mur- dered girl the defense of Durrant declared 1t had nothing more to offer. Barnes_then announced it had been agreed t| he might have the privilege of recalling one of the witnesses for the de- fense for further cross-examination, and after_judicial sanction had been accorded the District Attorney opened his case in rebuttal by calling Joseph A. Davis, a trustee of Emmanuel Baptist Church. Joseph A. Davis, treasurer of Emmanuel raham. and how he | | Church, was the first witness called by Mr. Barnes in rebuttal. He said he had known Durrant for about five years. “During the month of March or April did you notify the defendant that there was any- ing the matter with the electrical apparatus connected with the sunburners, or with the sunburners; or did yon request him to make | any repairs?” was Mr. Barnes’ chiei question. | Mr. Dickinson objected to it, claiming that it was not rebuttal testimony Judge Murphy said it was_his recollec- tion that Durrant bad testified that he | went to fix the sunburners on the 3d of April at the request of an officer of the jurch. Mr. Dickinson said he thought Durrant | had restricted it to a trustee of the church. | Mr. Barnes read from the record, which | showed that Durrant testitied that it was | either Mr. Davis' or Mr. Code’s place to { teil him when the apparatus needed re- pair. The court then overruled the objection, and Mr. Davis answered that he had not given Durrant notice to repair the apparatus, and had not spoken to him about the matter this year. He said further that it was not his place to ac- quaint Durrant with the condition of the gasburners or the electrical appliances. On_ cross-examination Mi. Dickinson asked the witness what knowledge he had of the lighting apparatus. Mr. Barnes objected, holding that such a question was not cross-examination, and that it would needlessly prolong the proceedings. Judge Murphy sustained the objection. P. D. Code, a trustee of the church, was mined by Mr. Peixotto. Mr. Code was ed if he had requested Durrant to re- | pair the gas or electrical apparatus durin the months of March or April. He replie that he had held no conversation with Durrant on the subject. Upon cross-examination witness said he remembered speaking to Durrant about the electric bells early in January. He | did not necessarily look to Durrant to re- pair the apparatus, Andrew Spaulding, a trustee of the church, testified that he had nothing to do with the lighting apparatus, and had | not requested Durrant to repair it. . B. Vogeli, trustee, gave the same an- swers. He did not have any conversation with Durrant concerning the lighting ap- paratu C. G. Noble, trustee, testified precisely the same, onlv adding that it was Trustee | Vogel’s duty to look aiter the lighting ap- | paratus. | C. W. Taber, the last of the five trustees | of Emmanuel Church, did not respond { when his name was calied. Mr. Barnes said that Mr. Taber had been | regularly subpenaed and asked that a | bench-warrant be issued for him return- | able forthwith. The court heartily con- | curred with this sentiment, and the war- | rant was 1ssued at once. C. W. Dodge, one of the students who met Durrant at the ferry on April 12, was then called. After preliminary questious Barnes asked: “Did you meet Theodore Durrant at the | ferry on’the afternoon of April 122" “Yes, sir.” “What time was it?” *‘About 3:30.” | ©“Were you aione?” , Sit. Who was w r. Dukes.” other student?” S ith you?” i have eny conversation with the defendant tell you in the presence of Dukes that he was waiiing for some mem- bers of the National Guard?” «‘He di “Did he mention the name of Blanche La- mont during that m€eting?” He did not. “When you approached Durrant did you or Dukes ask him it he had seen the missing girl, ignd he said no, but he was on the track of | her?” ““I don’t remember the answer, but one of us said something like that.” “Thet's all,” said Barnes, but there was no cross-examination. C. A. Dukes then came to the stand. Dukes was on his way to Temescal, where he lives, when he, with Dodge, met Dur- rant at the ferry on April 12. He was asked, as Dodge had been, as to Durrant’s statement about waiting for members of the National Guard. The witness said Durrant had made such a remark. He said, too, that something had been said | about Blanche Lamont, and had Durrant | heard anything of her? But the witness did not remember the reply. Dickinson then asked: “Was not the remark made something like “Durrant, have you found that girl you ran away with?'” “Something like that, I think.” ‘‘And your conversation was a general one, ;vnsqn. and not relating to any particular sub- ect?”” ““Yes, sir.” “Do you recollect meeting the defendant during the first two or three days of April, and having a conversation with him about electri- cal apparatus?” “I remember such a conversation, but I do not remember the date.” “When was it in relation to April 37" Barnes objected as a matter of form, for, | he said, the question was not a proper one | for cross-examination, but he said he was willing General Dickinson should ask the | questions. | “Itwas some time between the disappear- | ance of Miss Lamont and Miss Williams,"” said the witness, and then Duke was allowed to go. A. A. Hobe then took thestand. Mr. Hobe was at the 5:50 boat for @akland on April 12. He arrived-at the ferry at 5:05. **How long have you known Durrant?” “About eight e i | gurs “;)lijd you see hiln at the ferry on April 12.”" 7 did.» as he?” standing by the Howard-street Was e alone?”’ No, sir, there wasa young lady with him.” Who was that young lady?” 1 cannot iell.” Was it long or short "I‘{ wu"shnn, I l.hlh"\’k all o ““Was the young la er or shorter than this defi:nd:nc']"g o & She was shorter.” u;‘u!?!w uerfi‘\vem yga to Dunlntwhel}l v him talking t 3 red et g to this young lady on Friday, ‘I passed within ten feet of him.” “'And the Theodore Durrant you saw at that time is the Theodore D this case?”’ e Durraat, the defendant in “Yes, sir.” “Cross-examine,” said Barnes. “What was your business at that time?” be- gan Dickinson. < “I was not engaged steadily at that time. I vas interested in mining work."” “Where were your headquarters at that time?” “I generally was with my brother-in-law at 17 Steuart street.” “How long since you and this defendant censed to be schoolmates?” “About five or fix years.” “How frequently did you meet the defendant since then?” “About once in three months.” “Have you had any conversation with him since you graduated? “I cannot remember.” “Where did you ever meet him?” “Imet him once going to & man’s house in the Missio hose houde was that?” “George Pratt’s.” ¥hen was this?” “In 1888 or ’89." “When did you see him next?” “On the street somewhere or on a streetcar.” “What street? “I don’t know.” “What car?” A Valencia-stre And when did car, I think.” ou see him on the car?” o, sir.” ot since you left scnool?” “Xo, sir.” Holy was he dressed?” He had a large felt hat—soft.” “What color?” as he dressed otherwise?” t notice.” ““Was his coat a sack coat or not?’ I don’t know."” “Did he have his hands in his pockets?" “Idon’t know. The young lady was stand- ing between me and him, and I could not tell how he was standing.” “Did you see her face?” “No, sir.” “Where were they standing?” “About ten feet from the turntable of the Howard-street Railroad, at the edge of the pavement.” “Right by the depot?” “I'suppose yon would call it the depot.” “Well, by the building that the people enter to go on board the ferries?"” “Yes, sir.” “How long did you look at them?"” 1 just glanced at them as I passed?”’ “Did you catch Durrant’s eye?” “No, T did not.” “Did he look at you?” ‘‘He didn’t look in my direction at all.” “Did you fully recognize him?” “Yes.” Ilooked at him and recognized him.” “And then you passed on?” “Yes, I passed on.” ““Was there any particular thing about them to attract your attention?”’ “No, only that I wasacauainted with him.” “How do you fix the time?” ¢I compared my watch with the ferry clock when I went inside.” “Did you always do that?” “It was my general custom.” “Did you always get that boai?" «] generally tried toget it. ““How often did you miss it during themonth ot March?” Barnes objected to this because, he said, Theodore Durrant. it was incompetent, irrelevant and imma- terial, but the question was allowed. - “Idon’t think I missed that boat in March,” said the witness. “Are you sure?” “No, I am not sure.” iHow many times did you miss it in April?” “I don’t think I missed it then, either.’ “What particularly calls your attention to the time that day?” “I leit Steuart street at two minutes and I looked at my watch to see if I ha to o back and leave my overcoat.” ‘Did you carry an overcoat during the early part oi April?” ““I always carried an overcoat.” “How eise do you fix the time?” “Iremember meeting Durrant, and then I met a friend on the boat.” “Who was he?” . A. Daniels.” Vhat does he do?” “He works for the Southern Pacific.” The conri—How long did you go to school with Durrant? “About tbhree years.” “You knew him then?” “Yes, sir.”” General Dickinson—Was he in your particu- lar class or section?” ““I think he was with me in the fourth grade.” ““In‘what year was that?” “About '88 or '39.” “Your relations were never particularly friendly, were they?" “Not very.” \ Mr. Taber had put in appearance by this time, so the District Attorney asked for the withdrawal of the bench warrant, and C. W. Taber, one of the trustees of Emmanuel Church, was sworn. He testified that he had not spoken to Durrant about the gas or electrical appa- ratus. E. F. Glaser, a student of the Cooper Medical College and classmate of Durrant, was next sworn. His testimony bore di- rectly on the question of how Durrant secured his notes of Dr. Cheney’s lecture. “Did you attend Dr. Cheney’s lecture on the afternoon of the 3d of April?” asked Mr. Barnes. “J did.” “Did you take notes of the lecture?” “I did.” “On the 10th of April did you have a con- versation with Dursant at the college concern- 10'1.;[ l:led notes of Dr. Cheney’s lecture?” ast 5 time “State the circamstances snd what took place?” ““Well, it was in the clinic-room where we q met. I went over my notesand read them aloud to Durrant.” “glddbéxnnm take notes as you read?”’ “He did»" Mr. Dickinson—Students often met and com- pared their notes and quizzed each other, did they not? *‘Yes, sir.” “l{o\\' long were you in the room with Dur- rant?”’ “Perhaps ihree-quarters of an hour.” piDidhe have any notes of the leciure with im ?” “I don’t know.” *Did you see him have a book or papers?”’ “Yes, he had a notebook.” “Did you read your notes straight through, or parts here and there ?” ““Iread them all, with the ini pressing them upon our minds. “Did you repeat any parts?’ “I repeated the more important parts, laying ll;es:ll upon them to impress them upon our minds.” “You wanted to impress them upon your mind, you say?” “Upon ‘our’ minds, I said.” The court—What do you mean by “our” minds? “Durrant and myself. be quizzed about the lectur Mr. Dickinson—Was that an unusual thing for students to compare notes? *No, sir,” “You both made suggestions about the notes?” “‘Hardly that—we discussed the more impor- tant parts.” ‘“‘He had his notebook with him?” He had ‘a’ notebook.” “‘He read from his notes and you read from tention of im- did not reed. wrote in bis book.” The court—Was he copying your notes? “1 would not state that; he wrote as I read.” “Did he write in your presence?”’ “He did.” Mr. Dickinson—Were you a witness at the prellimlnnry examination?” “1 was.” Iread my notes and he “Did you testify then that you could not state what Durrant wrote down?” “Yes; I testified to that—I could not see what he wrote and did not try to see.” “‘And in this notebook he wrote down as you read?” “He did.” “Did he read anything from his notebook to you before he commenced writing?”" +No, sir; he did not.” The court—At any time did tne defendant read from his notébook anything that pur- ported u‘) be notes of the lecture taken by him?” “No, sir.” Mr. Barnes—You reported the fact of having read your notes to Durrant to Dr. Cheney?” “Yes, sir.” Court then adjourned for the noon recess. Lo THE AFTERNOON SESSION. Professor Price a Witness—Dr. Gra- ham Says Durrant Asked Him for His Notes of April 3. The afternoon session opened with a call for Professor Thomas Price to take the stand. He entered, bearing a large flat bundle, and this he opened on the stand. They were exhibits which he had been analyzing to ascertain if the gruesome brown gnarks upon them were stains of blood. “Professor Price, what is your business?” asked Barnes. ty-three years.’’ s are you a graduate?”’ “Of the Royal College of Dublin.” “I hand you this shoe and ask you if you have ever seen it before?” and Barnes handed up the pastor’s shoe. ““Yes, sir, [ have.” “Will you look at the sole of it,and I ask if you have ever examined the spots on it at the Tequest of the officers?” Dickinson—I object. Itisirrelevant. The court—Did I understand that when you offered this shoe in evidence, General Dickin. son, you claimed these spots were blood? Dickinson—I am not aware at present that the claim was made that these were blooa spots. The records were hunted through to find just why the shoe had been offered. It was found that Sergeant Reynolds had de- scribed the spot on the shoe, but had not stated specifically that it was blood. Ser- ifxmt Burke had also testified regarding it. e said the officers, had exsamined the shoes found for blood stains, and thatthey concluded there were none. In another part of the record—in Deuprey's openin, statement—it was found that geuprey ha called attention to the fact that he asked that the words of Sergeant Burke—‘We came to the conclurion they were not blood stains”—be stricken out. Barnes argued from this that the de- fense has, by these questions, thrown a doudt as to what the stains were. and he thought he had a right to prove they were not blood. Dickinson thought the testimony as noted showed nothing toward determin- ing what the stains were, and the court seemed 1inclined to side with the de- fense. . Barnes then claimed that the shoe was in evidence, that the stain was also in evi- dence and that it had been marked out, and therefore he had a right to show what the stain was, no matter what caused it. With this contention the court found more favor, and after analyzing the _sit: tion his Honor overruled the objection and the question was allowed. Professor of the belfry of Emmanuel Church. Both the boards’ had great red stains upon them. Witness also identified a section of the flooring cut out of the belfry, which was also conspicuously stained, and pointed out on the model of the beliry the places from where the exhibits were taken. Captain Lees said he had taken these specimens from the ckurch on the 15th of August last. When they had been full | identified and described, Mr. Barnes nz fered them in evidence. Mr. Dickinson objected to the evidence, goiming out that four months had elapse etween the occurrences of April 3 and the time the exhibits were removed, and also claiming that the evidence was not fairly | in rebuttal. It was the latter claim—that the proof was not rebuttal testimony—which struck Judge Murphy most forcibly, and upon that ground he said he thought the testi- mony was not admissible. He said he knew of nothing'that had been ottered by the aefense which this testimony could be said to rebutt. Claarly the offer of these exhibits should have heen made asa part of the main case. Mr. Barnes and Mr. Peixotto consulted for a moment, and then the former said, “We withdraw the proof,” and so ended the bloodstains on the belry stairs. Professor Price was then recalled, and was questioned as to what kind of gas the San Francisco companies furnish the City Dickinson objected, but Barnes was al- lowed to go on. The gas furnished now, he said, is of two kinds—water gas and coal gas—and he told how each was made, and how they were mixed together to form the common illuminating gas. “What are the propertiesof carbonic oxide?” asked Barn, “It i3 poisonous. An inflammable gas, but poisonous.” “The lowest say, of carbon 15 per cent?"” “Yes, sir.” “You have studied this gas?” “Yes, sir.”” “i\nd are famillar witn its elements?” “Tam “And of their effects upon the human sys- tem, are you not?” percentage, I understand you to c oxide in illuminating gas is am. “Let me put this hypothetical question to you?” Once more Barnes put the circumstances of the fixing of the sunburners which Dur- rant had told of " in his testimony; how he breathed the gas-tainted air arising from a. burner with twenty-four jets, each turned half on, and how he breathed this air for three, four or five minutes. Then he asked the witness what would have been the condition of & man in such a po- sition under such circumstances and after that length of time. Dickinson objected and the court sug- gested that Mr. Barnes include the amount of poisonous matter in the gas on April 3 | last. A single question sufficed to do this, | and then Dickison continued his protest. | _ He said the question was irrelevant and imperfect, as it was shown it was impos- sible for the defendant to have inhaled the gas from all the jets. He claimed there was no foundation for the question. Be- sides, he said, it was not rebuttal. The court held that the question was clearly one in rebuttal, but his Honor be- | hieved that any hypothetical question | should be fairly based upon the evidence. The objection was overruled, however, and the witness answered : “No one could breathe in these conditions for two minutes without beinzabsolmelf over- | come, even if he were in & healthy condition.” | ‘ross-examine,” said Mr. Barnes. “Do I understand vou to say there are two kinds of gas furnished by the companies of | this city?” “Not exactly two kinas,” and then the wit- ness once more explained the difference be- tween water and coal gas. “What amount of gas would escape from five or six burners?” “‘About two and a half or three feet an hour from each burner.” “At halt pressure?” “Well, yes; at half pressure.” m“A_lll gas burners are not of the same size, are ey ?” “No, sir.” "gne consumes three feet an hour?” “yesr And another consumes five feet an hour?” Yes 'And in one hour?” 'Yes.” And the gas is full pressure between 4 and the afternoon ?”* should say ves. In my experience, when e gas for melting, etc., I'should say it was.’ “What experience have you had as to the effect of gas upon & person?”’ “‘My experience is of a general nature, and my knowledge of the physicai and toxic effects ofgas I have gained from reading and from the Coroner’s office from examining blood. I have no rsonal knowledge. I have never been knocked down by gas.” “How long would a man live if breathing an 2 Dollars buys a good | Price then told of his analysis, after Dick- inson had objected once more and his ob- Jection has been overruled. His examina- tion had Eroved that the spots were not made by blood, but were made by some fatty or oily matter; or, as Barnes finally put it, it was a grease spot. The court—In making these tests did you make the test to see if it was blood? . “Yes, sir,” and then the witness told ust how he mixed his chemicalsand what e obtained from his tests; how a blue color had arisen in his mixing glasses, and how, while the absence of it would not have proved that_the stain was blood, still its presence positiyely indicated that it was not biood. “When did you first receive these articles?” continued Barnes, +In the latter part of August, 1895.” Have they been out of your possession since you made the test?"” “No, they have always been in my safe and under my seal.” “And this is the first time they have been opeYnedf" Y Yes.” A board was then shown him—it was a board from the belfry stairs. Over one of its surfaces ran dark brown stains, and pointing to these Barnes asked what the witness had found them to be. Dickinson objected, because the where- abouts of the board for the past few months bad not been shown, and Barnes then halted in the examination of Pro- fessor Price. He called Captain Lees to the stand to identify the board. uClP!lltn !{eeu was shown tw:d bgflrg:;?l! meout of the package opened by SoBy sor Price. He Ix’dena?ed one of them the tread and the other as the riser of one of the steps leading to the upper platform Shoe for men, | made of best California Beaver Calfskin and Cali- fornia Oak Tanned Sole Leather, well made, in all the usual styles The Big Shoe Factory Retailing Shoes at Factory Prices. ROSENTHAL. FEDER & CO, 581-583 Market Street. OPEN EVENINGS. Wit Of toe, lace or Congress. You don’t usually buy a good shoe for $2, but this is our Factory - price for a shoe every way equal to what retail- ers sell for W atmosphere bouic oxide “I can’t say. Maybe some minutes.” “How long about would he live?” “Ican'tsay. Ananimal wiil live only a few minutes.” ”tv:'hurged with 1 per cent of car- er been discovered how long & man found dead and with nothing toshow how long they had lived.” “What is the first effect of inhalation of gas upon a human being?”’ *Insensibility.” “Well, what would be the effect upon his ap- pearance?”’ *‘I cannot say.” “ «“What would be the effect of going into the pure air after inhaling gas, but not being overcome?”’ “‘Carbonic oxide is a virulentpoison. Itkills like prussic acid. - The pure air would have no effect.” | “You misunderstood we. I ask if he were | only affected by the gas, not overconie | “f dow’t know. They have generally been | | ., “If be were a strong man he might recover if he were not too far gone.” [ “How quickly would he recover?” | ¢:His recovery would be gradual. | ©It would depend then upon the amount | which he had inhaled?"” | Yes.” | . “Suppose the individual referred to by Mr. Barnes was over five or six burners in & | dinmeter of eighteen inches, and nothing at- | tracts the gas from the other jets to him, how | long could he exist?” | “My opinion is tha four minutes and recov | “How long do you thir could breathe?” “He could live half a minute or a minute.” | Hg\ml then get up and move away?,’ Dickinson was finished for the time be- | ing. and Barnes then started the witness in another direction. “What is the law of the diffusion of gases he asked. “Suppose the gas is turned on, will he couldn’t breathe for X HARRIET HUBBARD AYER'S Recamier Toilet Preparations JULIE RECAMIER. THE ORIGINAL QF THIS PICTURE RE- TAINED HER EXQUISITE COMPLEX~ 10N THROUGH THE USE OF RE- CAMIER CREAM UNTIL HER DEATH AT EIGHTY. No woman can be beautiful or even CLEANLY {n appearance whose face is marred by pimpies, blackheads, blotches, freckles or other imper- fections. These are the only skin remedles indorsed by Pphysicians. THEY ARE PURE. WHERE DID YOU EVER SEE SUCH INDORSEMENTS BEFORE? FROM MADAME ADELINA PATTI-NICOLINI- CRAIG-Y-N0s CASTLE, Oct. 13. “MY DEAR MRs. AYER—There never has been anything equal in merit to the Recamier-Prepara- tions; my skin is so im mensely improved by their use. T need not dread old age while these magic inventions of yours exist. I use Cream, Ealm and Lotion every day of my life. Recamier Soap also | is perfect. ‘I shall never use any other. I hear thet the Princess of Wales is delighted with the Recamier Preparations. I am convinced they are the greatest boon ever invented. A ffecti y yours, ADELINA PATTI-NICO. +1 consider them a luxury and necessity 1o woman.” ORA URQUHART POTT. ““Most refreshing and beneficial and FAR supe- rior to any others.” FANNY DAVENPORT. “The perfection of totlet articles.” AH BERNHARDT. “The Recamier Preparations are absolutely PEERLESS. I shall aiways use them.” HELENA MODJESKA. “T use the Recamlers religiously and believe them ESSENTIAL to the toilet of every woman who desires a fair skin.” LILLIE LANGTRY. “I unqualifiedly recommend them as the very best in existence.” CLARA LOUISE KELLOGG. Recamier Cream, {or tan, sunburn, pimpl etc. Price 81 50. ] Recamier Balm, a beautifier, pure and sim- ple. Price $1 50. Eecamier Almond Lotion, for freckles, moth and discolorations. Price $1 50. Recamier Fowder, forthe toilet and nursery, Will stay on and does not make the face shine. Prices—Large boxes §1, small boxes 50c. Recamier Soap, the best in the world. Prices— Scented 50c, unscented 25c. SPECIAL NOTICE. Refuse Substitutes. Send 2-cent stamp for sample of Tollet Powder, {i’fin‘\’phlel and Bargain offer. Mail orders promptly ed. HARRIET HUBBARD AVER, 131 West 31st St.,, NEW YORK CITY. onatel; LINL" every ER. ON ELECTRIC BELTS, BUY N0 BELTTILL you see Dr. Plerce's Latest Improvements! Bestintheworld! Every Belt warranted. Send for Free | 78 >amphiet, No, 2. Address DR. PIERCE & SON, 704 Sacramento street, corner Kearny, San Francisco. NEW TO-DAY. THIS WEEK WE OFFER AN IMMENSE PURCHASE OF SILKS At About 1/2 | The Regular Price. WE BOUGHT CHEAP AND SHALL GIVE THE BENEFIT TO OUR CUSTOMERS. THIS PURCHASE COMPRISES 3000 Yards Entirely New and Choice Designs in BROCADED, CHECKED ano FIGURED Taffeta Silks Which we have marked At the extraordinarily low price of This sale eclipses any praevious offer Come with great expectations Our word for It, no disappointments Black Broc;Eed Silks. In Black Brocaded Silks we are exhibiting | thelatest Parisian productions for fall an | yinter wear at from 50c at %2 25 per yard. We ask for an inspection of this line. | Neckwear. Somte of the choicest and daintiest articles | of Neckwear are now being shown in this department in Capes, Collarettes, Jabots, Guimps and Fronts in_entirely new ideas, which must be seen to be appreciated. Fans. The Queen Elizabeth, or small fan, in a choice collection of peintea’ and spangled designs, at_from 75¢ to §15 each. Ask 10 see these goods. Each one 1s & work of art. Sterling Silver. The most beautiful articles are manufac- tured this season from this precious metal. Our stock is replete with novelties of every description, from which the most varied taste can be suited. These gogds will well Tepay inspection. EXTRA. Just Opened—The Leading Styles in DRESS TFRIMMINGS. Beautiful Spangled Band Edgings, Laces and Nets. goods. an Dykes, Yokes, u should sée these No trouble to show them. NEWMAN & LEVINSON, 125, 127, 129, 131 Kearny Street. 209 Sutter Street. NEW WESTERN MOTEL. EARNY AND WASHINGTON STS. modeled and renovated. KING, W European plan. Rooms 60c to $1 50 10 $8 per week, $8 to $30 per month Dot and cold water every room; fire g Toom: elevator runs all night. —RE- ARD & CO, per day, $3 ; ireo baihs: rates in every AK oN&MErp FIFTY Yo e i ING POWD 1895 {5 D ER STANDAR us BEFORE ano AFTER k| fferers are not oured by Doct MANHOOD RESTORE Pains In the Back, Seminal Eimepice: Unitnem o Harry, tion. Tt stopa ol Iosses b discharge, wliich ilnozcn-&ml all the horrors of Tmpotency. CUPEDI idneysand the urin of all 18 and restores smal B o Imperites. The reason u e T e S A ) R pertan m iven and money re for 45,00 by mall - Bend fof FREE Chebar bad cosragatare? C1eCt & Permancat cure, “CUPIDENE" This great Vegetable uvxmlur.meprmflp- ench physiclan, will quickly. cuufign of all per- of the aiis, stich as Lost Manhood, missions, Ne generative of 1 ryous De Exhavsting Dreins, Vas ) eads to Spermatorrhoea ENE cloansos 1he Hven, d ihe 1 weak organs, tors i3 because ninety per cent are tronbled with to cure without an operation. 3000 testimonk Address DAVOL MEDICINE €O., P, 0. Box 2076, San Francisco, Cal, For Sale by BROOKS' PHARMACY, 119 Powell stroet.