The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, March 1, 1897, Page 1

The VOLUME LX®XL-NO. 91. SAN FRANCISCO, MONDAY MORNING, WHAT OBJECTION CAN BE RAISED TO THIS BILL? Bribery Not Needed to Pass Such a Good Measure as No. 273. “EXAMINER” MUD ALL IN VAIN.| 4 In Calling Hearst’s Faking Journal to Account for Its Falsehoods Legislators Wil Show - That the New Law Will Benefit All Litigants. SACRAMENTO, Car, Feb. 28.—As time goes on the indignation of members og the Assembly increases more and more over the charge made by the Examiner that there was not a shadow of a doubt that membersof the Senate and Assembly had been bribed. The members of the lower house reaiize that the Senators have been hit harder than they. The Caminetti bill passed the upper house by & majority, while it went through the Assembly by a unanimous vote:” They say that the libel is a very ciumsy hkaY and they 2sk whether any one would imagine tnat Alvinza -Hayward or his friend, George W. Baker, would be foolish enough to buy a unanimous vote on a bill when a bare majority would be sufficient. The fact that the vote in the Assembly was unenimous is of itsel, they say, the best proof of the faisity of the charge. They say also that if there is “‘not the shadow of a doubt” in the mind of the Examiner thet legislators were bribed, the Examiner should have mentioned the names ot the guilty es and not have smeared with the vileness of the charge the innocent as well as the ilty. This is waat makes the libel more atrocious, and this is what may induce the Legislature to amend the libel law 50 as to embrace within its iron grip the new jour- 1 which is inflicting new disgrace upon California. s A Charges of bribery and lawbreaking, say some of the members, come with very bad grace, indeed, from a newspaper which ‘nearly every week violates the law by ad- lotteries and lottery drawings, and they say further that this latest calnmny be the incentive for bringing up the managers of the Examiner with a round turn on criminal charges. Caminetti, leader of the Democratic minority and autnor of the bill, fumed and chafed all day. He spent most of his timein tHe State library consulting autheriiies as to the merits of-;his bill, and preparing data for the question of privilege to which he intends to rise to-morrow morning: He proposes to ask the Governor to set a time at which he may have a bhearing, and he ‘will notify the Braminer to be sepresented at the beariug by its stioiusys snd 16 show cause] 1f tHey can, why the bill should be termed a bad ‘ene. He proposes to show that it is govd law, that a litigant whose house and home and very meaus of livelihood may.be at stake has a rignt to be tried before a Judge as unbiased as each one of the juries is required to be. The law provides that the defendant in & criminal trial may be tried before an unprejudiced Judge, but it makes no provision for equal protection in civil cases. ‘If every Judge in a civil case,” added Caiminetti, “*had the deceney to transfer the matter to some other department of the Superior Court when he knew that he would be unfitted to sitas a juror, there woula be no necessity for the bill which I presented, but experience has shown that some Judges are not decent. Referring to the charge of bribery, I will say that I had so much confidence in the justice of the pill that I did not ask a member to vote for it, and it passed unanimously. It is charged also that this bill was gotten up to fit the Hale & Noreross snit. Thatis not true. While it may have application in that as well as other cases, { will say that there never yet was a bill framed that couid not be said to fit some particular case. The Judiciary Com- mittee, composed of lawyers—men of learning and standing in the commnnity—passed upon the bill and declared thatjit was a just one. I do not wish to say anything more about this slander. What I have to add will be uttered on the floor of the House, and before the Governor in the presence of the Examiner’s attorneys, if they send any.” The indignation of the Assembly will be loudly voiced to-morrow. Whsther it will go o far as to exclude from the floor the representatives of the copyrighted fake Journal rempins to be seen. Even bets are being offered on tne outside that the legis- lators are in too much fear of the unscrupulous sheet to go that far. But to-morrow will determine that fact. FAKERS MUST ANSWER. |der it proper that this Senate should = institute an inquiry respecting the said es, and the evidence, if any, upon which are based, and the person or persons who Legislators Will Appoint a Commis- sion and Compel Hearst’'s Mud- circulated, gave or reported the statements, if oricsegs el | any, upon which the article was based and the SACRAMENTO, CAL.. Feb. 28.—Before | author, editor, printer, writer or person who many days Long Green Lawrence, man. | wrote or caused to be written or published or aging faker of the monarch of the fakers, | caused tobe publisned the said cbarges, and will have to divulge the author of the | :“I\Ei:leofllcl:hEOX|n;cl;:ldL;:\:rewu}l or rel; ing fake which attempted to cast a cloud on » t0 the end tha e guilt may be ex- the reputations of members of the Legis- | Do'ey, e, FRISned, whether 4t bo found 1o bs jature, or he will have to communicate | puprion o morr, CBislative bribery and cor- ruption % with his friends throngh the bars of 8 | den. Be iy therotonse o 01" Publicslan prison ceil. Resolved, That a committee of three be forth- Despite its cowardly attempt to avoid | with appointed and that said committeo be, {he responsibility of having aspersed the | and it is hereby authorized and empowered to ~mmum of irreproachable legislators, t‘lo any and all things necessary to make a e members feel 1t & duty to take such | U1 884 complete investigation of the matters tion as will compel the Examiner to contained herein above enumerated, and to substantiate its charges of bribery or take thatend to employ all necessary clerical as- sistance, und that said committee be, and it the consequences, and the consequences will neitber begight nor uncertain. hereb is, authorized and empowered to send Senator Morehouse, who was the only for persons and pupers, and to take ail neces- sary means fo procure the aitendance of wit- member of the Senate on Saturday who :"-‘;d!z‘m:"‘n”‘;’c'x:xt\“fl and the members of i i 3 each of - comprehend in their full enormity the | o) the provisions of article 8, chapter 2, title serious charges made by the “new jour- |y part3, of the Political Code of this State, nal’”’ faker and the courage to hurl back | relative to the sttendance sna examira'fon of the falsehoods contained therein in the | witnesses beiors the Legis ature and commit- teeth of the traducer, feels that the honor | tees thercof thall spply to the committee ap- ot only of each member sought to be | Pointed under this resolution; and that the smirched but of the whole Senate as a body is involved, and to-morrow wil in- troduce the following significant resolu- Sergeant-at-Arms of the Senate is hereby auth- orized and directed to serve any and ail sub- penas and orders or other process that may be issued by the chairman of said committee, when directed 10 do so by the said chairman. This resolution will give the committee appointed all the vpowers of & court, even that of inflicting penalties and punishing contempt of court. An important prece- dent to the present situation is furnished in tne case of D. O. McCarty, printed in the Twenty-ninth California Report. He had charged the Legislature with bribery in connection with the election of a Unitea States Senator. He was called before a committee to testify as to who had paid money or received money in connection with that matier. He refused to answer and was sentenced to imprison- mentand lodged in j2il. He had a writ of habeas corpus sworn out in his behalt, but the Supreme Court held he could not be released, as the Legislature is the actual Supreme Court ot the State and nigher in acthority than the regularly constituted supreme tribunal of the Sta After calling attention to this ca or More. ouse, in an interview refer- ril to the Exammer’s article, saud: «“Here is a charge that members of.the Legislature had been bribed to vote for this measure and that in the Assembly £as, An article appeared in the San o Daily Exsminer, a newspaper pub- auc sed in the City and County of Stn Fran- cisco, State of Californis, and circulated over tie State of California and over various States e United States and elsewhere, which | o printed and pubiished and cir- | slnted is in the words and figures following e follows the article, head and all as printed in the Examiner]; and, whereas, the ve cited words in said article so printed, 5 of the grayest cnaracter for the pu ! influencing the action of this Senat whereas, it s specifically charged that © sume of money have been received by the whers of this body, and which said mem- uot specifically named, but leaving ¢ impression and iutending (o leave the jm- esslon gnd and intending to Uarge that each, every and all the members 1is Sennie who voted for Assemuly bill No. emending Section 170 of the Code of Civil M“’"‘l’;e of this S:ate, had been paid end Trom sasqiceved money amounting fn sums sembly ) 1000 stch for voting for said As | o cnarges are ve e and, whereas, the said Soter auxe very grave and of serious char- cter and reflecting upon the entire Senate, and Were made and published as sforesai and are of such character s to rei Pro THE Pser- The Great 25-Mile ‘Handicap Bicycle Road-Race Held Over the ; San Leandrs Triangle Yesterday. ; ? $150 was paid for each vote and in the Senate from $350 to $500. The charge is emphatic. Thousauds of dollars, it says, | have been corruptly paia-—not may have been paid or supvosed to Bave been paid. Consequently this Legislature cannot stand by and be thus cuarged with feiony, for that is what the crime would be.* And they further state ‘Soma gijod gentlemun has been toiling diligently at the capitol a3 o distributor of bribes.” Then it says *Without a shadow 6f doubt members cf the Assembly and members 6f the Senate were bribed to support the bil,” and also ‘Several thousand dollars changed hands.’ “It will thus be seen that the charge made is positive and certain, and no hon- est man in either branch of the Legisla- ture can afford to permit so serious a matter to pass unheeded. If it be true that any member of the Senate or any member of the Assembly has taken a bribe for the passage of this measure then the Legislature owes it to the people of the State that such member be exposed and prosecuted and convicted of his crime, whoever he may be."”’ *On the other hand, should it be untrue itis equally the duty of the Legislature to probe the matter to the bottom so that it may be shown to the world that news- papers have no right to traduce reputable men by undertaking to break down their standing and character in the community, and for that reason I intend to introduce a resolution in the 8 nate to-morrow morning calling for an investigation com- mittee with fuil power to act, such com- mittee to have power to send for wit- nesses and examine and cross-examine them to learn the truth concerning this matter, and to punish witnesses for con- tempt for not giving testimony concern- ing the matter. 1 believe that the members of the Sen- ate are honest, and Ido not believe that any of them have taken a bribe, or have been approached in a criminal way upon this matter, or any other during this ses- sion of the Legisiature, and I therefore believe that the other membvers of the Senate all feel that they ows it to them- selves—and I believe we all owe it to the State—to conclusively establish the fact that we are nonest men and have been discharging a public duty honestly: and faitnfully. “If the Examiner is right then it ought to have the credit of exposing bribery and corruption, and -if it is wrong.then it ought to be, for its course and policy in this matter, condemned. I shall move and hope that the chair appoint ‘on the committee members who voted in the neg- ative on this bill.” I is understood that Morehouse will bave the support of the whole Senate on his resolution asking for an investigation, for should any Senator refuse to co-oper- ate 10 the matter such action might place him under the ban of suspicion, AR U NO BRIBERY NEEDED. Laws Governing Minor Litigants Should Bs Extended to the Superlor Court: What is the matter with Assembly Bill No. 273, now in tie hands of the Gover- nor, about which such a storm is attempt- ed to be raised by the Examiner? 1s it possible that a Legislature could be assembled in California who would have to be bribed to support a measure so em- inently just as this? From the statement in the paper referred to, it would seem that this was a piece of unprecedented legislation in the interest of some partic- ular case, and. this intimation has sag- gested to THE CALL the propriety of ex- amining the statutes of other Btates in order to determine whether the proposed bill was in the line of existing lawsin the older States or a new departure peculiarto Calilornia. Without haviog time to pursue the in- quiry through all the States, we find the act amply supported by the statutes of many States, some of which are to be found below. The bill introduced by Mr. Caminetti re-enacts the existing law and makes this amendment: ? “No Justice, Judge or Justice of the Peuce shall sit or act as sach in any action or proceeding: * * ¥ * - of either party that he has reason to belicve and does believe hat cannot have fairand papartisgacts Fosiorer thig T ‘or Judge abeut to <! the prejudic: or bias of such Justice or Judge; in erther of which cases said Jue- tice or Judge shall fo thwith secure the services of some otler Justice or Judge of the same or an adjoining county 10 pre- side at the trial of said action; provided that in actions in the Superior Court of counties or cilies and counties having more than one department said actions shall be transferred to another aepartment thereof and tried iherein in the same manner as though originally assigned to such department.” The €>de of; Alabama, volume I, section 2645, provides: ‘*‘Either party to a civil suit may, aL any time before the trial, move the court to change the venue, mak- ing an affidavit that, for cause set forth, he cannot have a iair and impartial trial in the county where the suit is pending. The court may direct a change to the neares! county free from proper exception by elther party, to be determined by affi- davits.” The revised statutes of Maine, page 696. section 14, provide: “Any Judge of the Supreme Judicial Court, whiie holaing a nisi prius term, gn motion of either party sha.l, for cause shown, order the transfer of any civil action or criminal case pend- ing in said court to the docket thereof in any other county for trial, preserving all attachments.” Annotated tutes of Colorado, 1891, section 2624 “a”, provide: “When a party applies for ehange of venue on account of the prejudice, interest or relationship of the Judge, or that tne Judge has been of counsel for cither party, it shall be com- petent for the Judge 8o challenged to set down the cause for trial on a day fixed, not exceeding, however, ten days from the date of application, and he may there- upon call npon one of the other Judges to try said canse.” Revised Laws of Wisconsin, Volume II, page 1497, provide: “*Whenever an application shall be made in any civil or criminal action or proceed- ing in any Circuit Court for a ehange of. the place of trial on the ground that the prejudice of ‘the Judge of the court in which said action or proceeding is then triable, such Judge in his discretion may retain such action: or procesding in the same court without entry of an order to change the place of trial until the last day of the then current term, if the applica- tion was made at a term at which the ac- tion or proceedIng is triable, or the next term if it is made in vacation, and in the meantime shall call upon some other Cir- cuit Judge or Judges to attend and hold court during such current or next term for the purpuse of trying all such actions or proceedings in which application for change of place of trial has been made on account of the prejudice of the Circuit Judge."” Revised Laws of Indians, Volume I, section 416, provide: “The court in term or the Judge thereot in vacation shall change the venue of any civil action upon the application of either party made upon affidavit showing one or more of the following causes: * . When either party shall make and file an affidavit of the bias, prejudice or interest of the Judge before whom said cause is pending.’” General laws of Minnesota, 1895, chap- ter 306, provide: ‘Whenever. in any civil action pending in any District Court of the State, any party to the action shall, not less than six days before the first day of the term at which said action.is noticed for trlal, make and file with the presiding Judge and serve upon the opposite party, or his attorney, an affidavit stating that on account of vrejudice or biss of such presiding Judge, he has good reason to believe, and does believe, that he cannot ‘4. When it appoars from the affidayit |- case by reason of | MARCH 1, 1897. PRICE FIVE CENTS. | have a fair and impartial trial of said action, said presiding Judge shall forth. with procure the services of some other Judge of ¢t e same or another disirict to preside dt the trial of said action, and said action shall be continued.on the cal- endar until some other Judge can be se- cured to preside at said trial.” Revised statutes of Wyoming. 1887, sec- tion 3400, provide: ‘‘Whenever either party to a civil action in any District Court of the territory shall file an affidavit in the case, stating one or more of the following causes: * * * Third—That the person making the affidavit believes that on account of the bias or prejudice or interest of the presiding Judge he can- | not obtain a fair trial * * * the Court Judge shall change the venue in such .action, ete.” Hill's “Annotated Laws of Oregon, 1892,” volume 1, page 167, section 45, pro- vide: “The court or Judge thereof may change the place of trial on motion of either party to the action when it appears from the affidavit of such party * * * that the Judge or the inhabitants of the county are so prejudiced against the party making the affidavit that he cannot ex- pect an impartial trial before said Judge or in said county, as the case may be.” Statutes of Nevada, 1895, page 64, pro- vide: ** * * When from any cause the Judge 18 aisqualified from acting in the action, except in any case when it shall appear by the affidavit of either party to the action that the said party ¢annot, by reason of the interest, bias or prejudice of the Judge, have a fair and impartial trial, in which case the Judge so designated in such affidavit shall not further preside in the case, but instead of ordering a change of the place of trial to another county may invite another Judge to preside in, hear and decide such case.” The foregoing quotations from the laws of other States, to which many of a simi- lar import might be added, conclusively eataplish the fact that the Assembly bill ‘now assailed is strictly in line both in form and substance with the provisions of these statutes, and seem to have been taken almost bodily from the statutes of Minnesota. And what substantial objection can be reasonably ‘urged against thiy law? It simply provides that a suitor in our courts shall not be compelied to have a man sit in judgment upun him when he makes oath that on account of the bias or preju- dice of such Judge he cannot receive a fair and impartial trial But it is said that the law might effect the Hale & Norcross sitigation and that in thie event that the case is again sent back from the Supreme Court for a new trial it might be removed from Judge Hebbard's court. Even il this were true, that is no reason why all the litigants in the State should be denied the benefits of a substantial right, because in a remote contingency, in a given case, it might op- erate as a hardship, and we are by no means convinced that the reasoning is logical in the given case. It is certainly not to be believed that Judge Hebbard in the Hale & Norcross, or any other suit, would desire to preside at the trial if either party to it would make oath that by reason cf his prejudice they did not believe they could receive justice at his hands. Indeed no self-respecting Judge would go on with a trial, realizing that he was under suspicion of partiality in favor of one of the contending parties. The decisions of other States having this statute show also that there has been nro abuse of the privileze thus afforded, and it is therefore made apparent that the Legislatura by its enactment through the House by a unanimous vote, and the Sen- ate by a fair' majority, were actuated wholly and simply by the same motive« that controlled its enactment in other States, “namely,” to promote the ends of justice. -Read what section 833 of the Code of Civil Procedure says: The court may, at any time before the trial, on motion change the piace of trial in the fol- Towing c: 1. When it appears to the satisfaction of the Justice before whom the action is pending, by afiduvit of either party, that such Justice is a. material witness for either party. 2. When either party makes and files an affi- davit that he belfeves that he cannot have a fair and impartial trial before such Justice Continued on Second Page. DELIAS WS SPEEDIEST Coast Record Broken in the Big Bicycle Handicap. ROUND THE SAN LEAN- DRO TRIANGLE. For Number of Accidents, En~ -trants and for Time a Re- markable Meeting. E. A B0ZI0 SECURED- FIRST PLACE. A Large Attendancs Epj ys the Ev:nt. No Serious Casualties Reported. The fifth annual twenty-five mile ha: cap road race of the California Associated Cycling Clubs was run yesterday morning over what is known as the San Leandro triangle and, in points of entrants, acci- denis and time made, was the most re- markable event of its kind ever held by the association. There were originally 103 entrants, of which number eighty-three actually siarted and forty of them met with mis- haps which threw them out of the race, leaving but forty-three to finish, yet seventeen of these came 1n under the best previous record for the course, made by Charles 8. Wells iast year, 1:10:30 2-5. The best time of yesterday’s race was made by popular Tony Delmas of San Jose, who covered the distance in 1:09:34 1-5. The winner turned up in E. A. Bozio of the Imper.al Cyciing Club of this City, who had a time handicap of five minutes, and whose net time was 1:10:27. The California Associated Cycling Clubs is an organization which has been in ex- istence about five vears in this State, and is made up of twenty of the most prom- inent cycling ciubs hereabouts, including nearly all the San Francisco olubs and those of Qakiand, Alameda, Santa Rosa, Sacramento, Ban Jose and elsewhere. On TWashington’s bisthder of Pasin year silve 1493 the various clubs belonging to the as- tion have run a joiat road race over the San Leandro course, and yesterday's event was the one for 1897, postponed from last Monday owing to the poor con- dition of the roads at that time. Besides this annual race the association conducts a 100-mile relay race in April, a twenty- mile team race in July and a ten-mile handicap in October every year, and valu- able prizes are always hung up for the winners. The course over which the men rode yesterday was not in as good condition this year as formerly, on account of the recent heavy rains. T.e riders also hed a strong wind to contend with on one side of the triangle, though it heiped them a little on another side. For a twenty-five mile road race the San Leandro triangle presents many advantages and is an ideal one for tne purpose. The start is made on the Haywards road about a quarter of a mile to the northeast of San Leandro. The riders here have the base of the tri- angle, which they follow toward Hay- wards, turning 1o the right before reach- ing that town, which gives the perpendic- ular and takes them past San Lorenzo, when they turn west on to the county road from 8an Jose, giving the hypothe- nuse, which brings them back to the place of starting. The total distance thus made is eight and one-third miles, and by mak- ing the cin:ém three times the required twenty-five niiles are comp eted, and the spectators have seen the start of the i NEW TO-DAY. Sisyphus ‘was the anci- ‘ent hero con- demned by the ods to push a big oulder up - hill forever, lest it should roll down and crush him. When the myth-mak- ers got up that story they must have been thinking of dyspepsia ; for there is certainly no other trouble on earth that keeps you so ever- lastingly struggling against being crushed into utier despair. Anything that cures dyspepsia. lifts about half the weight of misery that crushes mankind, —aud wo- mankind. The trouble with most of the so-called dyspepsia - cures, is that they don’t cure. They give only temporary relief. Indiges- ..on’ usually extends all through the diges- tive tract, from the stomach clear down to the large intestine ; the liver too is frequent- Iy involved in the trouble being torpid and inactive. For a thorough, radical, per- nanent cure you must have the whole di- gestive organism set right.—Not violently stirred up, but regulated. Doctor Pierce’s Pleasant Pellets will do it. They stimu- fate the digestive juices of the stomach ; invigorate the liver and help it to actively secrete the bile; and act gently on the bowels to promote a regular healthy move- ment. This means a complete and last- ing cure of digestive troubles. The *““Pelléts’ are not a severe cathartic. They act on the bowels naturally and com- fortably though surely. The dose can be regulated to your needs, and when the “Pellets’’ have done their work they can be discontinued. You don’t become a slave to their use, as with other pills. If the druggist suggest some griping that ves. i more orofit, think wild yos w0sh —