The San Francisco Call. Newspaper, April 28, 1901, Page 6

2 THE SUNDAY CALL [ an unfortunate and unguard- ed moment, at least from the viewpoint of the fair ser, a Chicago Judge made remarks that led his listeners to understand that he was not partial to women as truthful witnesses. In fact he said that a woman’s testimony was by no means as reliable as that of a man. Then immediately sprang up the question, “Is a woman’s testi- mony as trustworthy as a man’s?” That question is being discussed all over the United States and has awakened so much interest that The Sunday Call has asked some of San Francisco’s prominent Judges for an expression of their opinion, their own experience with witnesses. SEX REALLY MAKES NO DIF- FERENCE. T may be sald, by way pf preface, e are certain virfues practi polized bv women, and othe (though very few, it must be fran acknowledged) the oftener fou frtue nor founded on t ar But n ts a i to, or charg sex more than the svious fact 0 to mak £00d « to here is this if we but know a a. d not in tk g nt, but good ) that it bespeaks a virtue-loving ax c whether of low degree and further his moral train- ng to have b we . dity and tion_dovetailing that man’s consc! e him im- many and crimes occasion thus a man S on be- merely il the general exception to the vice of ly in dealing w 16 tests by which we determine ¢ s p ge dictun k ge weather prophet, all sign r weather. The only inferen draw from this fact is that lying may differentiated from the other vices this. The tendency or proneness to Vi general is the result (as above mated of a natural tendency in that Ai- rection, due to heredity training or t the two factors working in_combination while upon the other hand the specifi vice, lying, 1s largely a matter of consti t nsity which, though modi- fied never altogether controlled by s corre Or, in_other this inborn 1 tue, be linked with a thousand crimes. The best evidence, to my mind, that 1 am not wrong in this view is that the ex- preseion “*he is a constitutional liar” Is a rackneved phrase often used in speaking of men known, as a tactful Japanese cu- phoniously expressed it, to habitually “say the thing that is not.”” 1l that I bave thus far said mav seem >t to bear upon the question you ask, it is relevant as explanatory of wer I am about to make thereto. ~ Witnesses, with reference to thelr credi- biiity, may be divided into three general classes—the witness who, in the language of the witness’ oath, tells “‘the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth’'; the witness who tells a lle, a whole lie nothing but a lie, and the witness ns to tell the truth, but unwitting- eason of an excitable imagination, by bias of one sort or another, widely therefrom. This third 3 admits of several subdivisions, but the above general classification must serve our present purpose. I must that 1 cannot recall any woman, testifying before me, whom I could justly assign to the second class—that of the deliberate, perjured liars; but more than one man stimony I have heard I unhesitatingly place there. Within the f ass—those who tell the strict trath irrespective of the re- sult—I place a number of witnesses, about equally divided as to sex. to this point honors are largely with the women. It is when 1 come to deal with the third class above mentioned that woman comes to grief. The average witness, even more than he or she realizes, is a partisan; and be- ing a partisan, is often unconsciously and therefore innocently influenced by rong partisan feeling to believe that to be true which best serves the interest of the par- ty in whose behalf the witness testifies Women are more susceptible than men, 1 think, to this weakness, though it is a defect it must be confessed that oft leans to virtue's side. For its mainspring, moest instances, is sympathy or love. Vet fact {hat must be reckoned with by lawyers and Judges, and tends frequently to detract from the credibility or trustworthiness of a woman's sworn eme For the ultimate fact to be resclved from a witness’ testimony is the h or falsity of his statement, rather 1 a sentimental and metaphysical in- y as to why his testimony, if false, rything considered anted in saying that than men a if a po: tion were I do not feel women are less h witnesses. In- tive answer to your ques- sted upon, I would feei it my duty to say that woman, in the ab- stract, is more Tegardful than man of the sanc of an oath. GEORGE H. CABANISS. VERY TRUSTWORTHY ARE WOMEN. S a woman's testimony as trust- worthy as a man's? Yes. Responding to the influence of mod- ern belief the law has granted woman the right to acquire and conve; property, to engage in business, to part ! = in the management of corpora to administer the estates of de- The exercise of these frequently causes litigation and necessitates the taking of woman's testi mon; Were there the ightest presump- tion ¢ possibil of a difference be- tween the worth of a woman's word and the word of a man the granting of these powers would be a mockery, for one of the fundamentals of litigation is that What position would a woman occupy in the forum where her rights are being de- termined if, in addition to the rules which apply when judging the credibility of all witnesses, there should be appiied to her the faintest assumption that be- cause she is a woman her statements are worthy of less trust than those of her malé opponent? Is the confidence presses in the woman's fied? Considering the many and varied influ- ences of environment which surround the individual in our day tending to affect his point of view, it would sometimes seem that the narration of a plain statement of facts has become a fine art. Where self- interest, the desire to win, the prejudices of education, commercial and social stand- ing, pride of wealth, or despair of poverty which the law ex- testimony justi- are involved, it is difficult to separate facts from conclusions, or to make unem- ‘bellished and accurate statements, Lapses from the truth, the coloring of facts and the suppression of testimony, however, are not more noticeable among women than among men witnesses: as many among the stronger sex as among the weaker are prone to disregard the ob- ligation to tell the whole truth, and to for- get that to tell less than the whole truth is to deceive. Courts recefve with caution the evidence of the swift witness, the hostile witness, the abnormally litigious person, the per- son of weak memory, the witness with the photographic memory who pretends to re- collect. accurately the most minute de- talls of immaterial matters, the witness who cannot be mistaken, the over-voluble witness and the witness who seeks to im- pose_his conciusions upon the court in- stead of the facts about which he is being interrogated; but these types are not con- fined to either sex. In answering the question propounded it must be remembered that many among the women who appear in courts do not represent the average woman. 4 By reason of her intuitiveness woman is, perhaps, more desirous to have her opin- HAVE MORE REGARD FOR AN OATH. O the question, “Is a woman's tes- timcny as trustworthy as a man’s?’ 1 would make answer in the affirmative. T believe that as a general rule a woman has more regard for the solemnity of an cath than a man. At least they have so impressed me while taking the oath and giving their evidence. i have also noticed that a woman will give more attention to details than a man and observe many small things that would escape the average male witness. While making the general statement iat a woman's testimony is as trust- worthy as a man’s and perhaps more so, there is one case, however, where the rule will not apply and that is when a mother is testitymng in behalf of a child accused of an offense. In such instances the mother will almost invariably stretch a point or two in order to save her child, but perhaps this is more than pardonable. Judging from the verdicts of juries in cases that have been tried before me where the evidence of a woman was ar- rayed against the evidence of a man, I would say that people generally place more confidence in' the testimony of a woman than of a man, because in every instance the jury has returned a verdict in accordance with the evidence given by the woman. I recall one case In particu- lar, tried recently before a jury where the evidence of one woman _prevailed as against the direct contradiction of three male witnesses. ALFRED J. FRITZ. SEEM TO HAVE BUT ONE FAULT. stand is equally as reliable as the testi- mony of the man, but there may be excep- tio and in that case one must be a gquainted with the specific circumstances in order to frame an ovinion. The only fault I have observed in wo- men testifying is a desire at times to dwell upon unimportant details and a few instances where they favored the admis- sion of hearsay testimony. Men have been equally gulity in this respect, however. When there {s something at stake and by stretching the testimony the object may be attained I have never been able to ob- serve any circumstance that convinced me that a woman's testimony is less trust- worthy than a man’s. Sitting as Judge of the Police Court for several vears I have heard innumerable witnesses, men and women, and I have always directed myself to observing their manner on the witness stand and their style of delivery, therefore consider my- self somewhat of an expert on the sub- ject. My calm, deliberate judgment is that a woman’s testimony Is equally as Lrust- worthy as the testimony of a man. 3. P. MOGAN, KEEN PERCEPTION OF EVENTS. 8 to testimony in criminal cases I must 'say that a woman as a wit- ness is just as keen in her percep- tion of events that have happened as a man and in many instances mcre so, and particularly as to identifi- cation. In a matter of identification a woman can at one glance take in the whole situation, even to the particular ap- pearance and dress of the person to be identified. The Durrant case, which pre- camination was held in the de- partmernt of the Police Court over which 1 preside, demonstrated this theory most clearly. For instance. A man might accuracy to a marked degree. Yes, I re- peat that in all my experience as a ‘crimi- pal lawyer, prosecuting officer and Judge I must say that a woman's sense of per- ception, and particularly as to identifica- tion, is as perfect if not more so than that of a man. C. T. CONLAN. NO GENERAL RULE CAN APPLY. HETHER a woman's testimony is as trustworthy as a man's de- pends upon the woman; also up- on ths man. Some women are born liars 2nd cannot speak the truth; the same may be said of some men. My experience has taught me that no general rule will apply to either sex. I have met many women whose word was worth far more to me than that of many men. Likewise, have I met many men whose word was verity itself. Perjury is committed more often than any crime known to the law, but it is impossible to say which sex is most prone to commit it. With some people lying is a disease, in my opinion as prevalent with one sex as with the other. The female liar, though, seems to lie from the mere lust of lying. Sex, however, cannot govern the credence to be given to testimony. I find that a care- ful observation of the manner of the wit- ness, the expression of the face, together with the movements of the hands and feet, the intonation of the voice and the presence or absence of the liar's hacking cough and clearing of the throat are tests of the greatest service in determining the verity of testimony. CARROLL COOK. TWOFOLD ASPECT TO BE CONSIDERED. testimony as trustworthy S A womar as a man’s?” From my roint of view, and for the purposes of differentiation, the answer should be cilcited from a twofold as- pect of question presented—first, where the element of sentimental interest is wanting in the giving of testimony, and second, where that element is present. I shall give my views in that order. Under the first aspect I must venture an unqualified affirmative answer to the question. Broadly speaking, I belleve that the testimony cf a woman is as depend- able a n’s, and that it will serve eauallv the interests of truth. In declaring this conclusion I do not leave out of view the claim, which is so frequently asserted,-that a man is more likely than a woman to reach a hard- headed understanding of a given situation upon which their respective senses may operate—that his sentimerts and emotions would have less play in the formation of his impressions. Those who subscribe to this opinion ac- count for man’s superiority upon theories of inherited temperamental advantages, and the claim that he Is vouchsafed a closer experience in and Intimacy with those elements which deal with the actu- alities rather than the sentimentalities of human existence. In other words, the claim is that by inherited qualities and worldly training, a man is beiter qualified to scientifically resolve into facts the evi- dence of things which are presented to his senses than are the members of the gentler sex. In support pointed out that of this theory it is further ese disparities between the sexes have continued so long that man’'s advantage is fundamental, and that while the cnlarged range of woman's in the materi days 1 affairs of life in is calculated to neutralize nrages in women that never- theless nothing but the slow process of time will cause the disparities to disap- standpoint has a superlor claim upon the sclence of truth. But I claim that under the law of compensations and for other reasons this advantage is overcome. For the very absence of worldliness in human rature increases the disposition to tell the truth, and this assumption, joined to the fact that woman's more delicate percep- tions enable her to form more impres- slons from what she sees and hears and thus to contribute with fidelity the small details which form so important a part in the determination of facts and the scien- tific ascertainment of truth, easily place her on an _even plane with the lords of crea In short, a woman's very un- worldliness and impressionableness supply compensating advantages. I have some reserve in my answer to the second aspect of the question—where the element of sentimental interest is present in the giving of testimony—Is a Woman as trustworthy as a man? I am possessed of a spirit of reserve be- cause 1 believe that where the maternal instinets are involved a woman's testi- mony is apt to be subject to some legiti- mate discount. The disposition to come to the rescue of an offspring, whether the latter be culpable or not, is pronounced in many mothers. It may be said of courts of justice that this experience is not unusual and it may also be pointed out that the men upon whom the duty rests to weigh such testimony in the in- terests of truth and justice rarely resolve it against the mother's story of an alibl or whatever the particular defense may be. Daughters and sisters sometimes lend their testimony against the dictates of truth to save the family honor from the felonlous taint. The laws of afinity likewise make responsive though illegiti mate demands upon female witnesses. Not Infrequently the case of the prose- cutor is relieved of its potentials by the groundless story of a wife or sweetheart But this- is not always Woman's consclence is frequently seen to be the master even over the claim of ties of blood and affi t or the pressure of other sentiments. Several illustrations may be cited: Two boys were Jjointiy charged with crime. TI were either jointly in- nocent or jointly gul The Tespective mothers appeared as witnesses. One sub- scribed squarelv to what was afterward demonstrated to be a bogus alibl. The other faliered and finally declined .to give countenance by false testimony to the effort to save the lads from merited punishment. And to an observer the consclentious mother was the more gen- uinely concerned over the outcome of the trial. Some time since a domestic, to whom her female employer had become quite attached, was on trlal on a charge of having committed grand larceny of the property of her mistress, which under the facts of the case Involved a_serious betrayal of confidence. Upon the em- ployer’s clean-cut testimony the unfor- tunate girl was convicted. ‘And yet tween the sessions of the trial and with a rare kindliness, the former employer was seen be ylelding comsolations to the discredited employe. This witness would undoubtedly have been gratified if the defendant had been spared. but that gratification found no expression in the convincing story she told to the jury. The defense in a recent rather desper- ate case included a claim that on account of an affront offered to the afanced sweetheart of the defendant by the de- ceased In the case the defendant was moved to a state of mind which culmin- ated in homicide. The opposing claim was that no such affront was offered by the deceased. The afflanced sweetneart was placed upon the witness stand in the confident expectation that the claim of the defense would be sustained by her story. It soon became apparent, how- ver, from the distressed marner of the witness t the expectation would not be realized, and consequently the claim ended in theory. Such illustrations might be multiplied R e ) Ewor Trnate & Tinr, feeoiis every withess s Dresmel\fo spesk * the one Setelvald e torimans: thare 1o roant ERY difficult question to answer mMeet a friend of his every day for a week, pear. to an extent as to leave in doubt the that may t ne to eradicate it in the truth. Such presumption may be over- But when the rules of evidence prohibit- in a few words, ““Is a woman's tes- and “?;”“ c=l»fdt;‘h;:t‘kifr . (]Jlm and paxl; It is pfrnhah‘: not to be denied that by question whether they represent the ex- best moral training, come in many ways, but to impair it by ing the statement of conclusions are ap- timony as trustworthy as a tern of a necktie his friend wore could virtue of man's nature. mental tendency to ceptions or the rule. e aib Benl b any subpesition’fukithe crenlbillty or | nilbAmo Ssason will appiar why dec tostic e i/ ’ not, for the life of him, tell you; but.on deal with realities rather than sentiments, Upon a copprehensive view of the sub- wise weak and prone to vice trustworthiness of a witn may be af- mony should be deemed less trustworthy Ll A 2 i the other hand, a woman just casually X r worldly training, he has ject it is my opinion that the sexes are if this, like that fected by any consideration of sex uld than the testimony of a man. I say as a general proposition the jntroduced to that friend once can n ntage over woman in deal- equally trustworthy as witn , his one vir- destroy the value of judicial inquiries. FRANK J. MURASKY. testimony of a woman on the witness day describe the person and his dre: ing with secular affairs,.and from that WILLIAM P. LAWLER. WO years ago James J. Corbett, accompanied by a California friend, into the Broadway Athletic v York, amid the cheers of rsty spectators, who had come together for the purpose of seeing McGovern make one of his whirl- ked Terr: wind Corbett bowed acknowledgments to the ovation and said to his guest of the even- ing: “I may get a hand or two from the crowd, but you will see to-night a boy who is the greatest fighter that has ever lived He's a h an fighting machine. All that is necessary is for somebody to look out for n before the fight, see that he in good shape and place him in the ring. The boy will do the rest.” And Corbett's words fit the facts ex- actly There is a man behind Terry Mec- ovein who looks out for every little de- tail of his life. That man is Sam Harris. Without him McGovern would be lost. He has depend- ed upon this man for four years and in all that time Terry has not proved in any manner or means recalcitrant to Harris suggestions. ] manager wields an ab- et at no solute power over the fighter, 3 but a mild time is it displayed in any wa, suggestion McGovern in the ring forgets everything t his pugilistic business. He steps the ropes for one set purpose, to lay low his antagonist with the utmost spatch. 1f the measure of success hangs n accomplishment of purpose, no one this world has been more successful han this same little terror in gloves. : is but one form of his succe: No professionally for the pure love of ting. The desideratum is always money and the more money & prizefighter else b man figh! earn, just so much more is he suc- sful. McGovern is the fighter, Harris is the money nd between the two th a bank roll that would men the rest of a long Govern is by no means a boy under domination or mastery of another m He has picked out a’manager and he allows the manager to manage. Terry wiu talk you on divers sub- jects, but the moment you stray into the forbidden realm he is at you with his pe- culiar, frank and pleasant smile: and “You'd better see Harris about that. This is strange in the pugilistic camp. Theatrical stars have their managers, but with the majority of pugilists there is such a strong love of lingual exercise in their make-up that they nullify every ef- fort made in their behalf by the so-called maragers. Harris is more to McGovern manager of his business affairs. He looks out for the big little fellow’s private mat- ters and invests the money that the fight- ing brings into the exchequer. He has made some lucky speculations fot McGov- ern. The two are practically partners in many business ventures, which in the ag- gregate represent considerably more than $100,000, all of which owes its basic than a strength to the use of a wonderfully clev- er pair of fists and the bright, shrewd brain of a skillful entrepreneur. McGovern and Harris have plunged into the theatrical bu: , and they run les and they give fights, all of which have proved to be remunerative. Prizefight promoters, north, east, south and west, have tried to break through the Harris crust_which shells McGovern in completely. They have ex- erted every effort to deal with the feath- erweight himself; they have gone so far promise untold benefits if the Ter- : Teddy would only do this and that ond agree to fight without dragging his rager into the negotiations. They as well try the repression of the Harri cGovern when it comes ct that more men than iscovered in their match-mak- ing endeavors. __The following incident will .show how implicitly McGovern relies upon Sam Har- ris. Frank Erne, the lightweight cham- pion, is bristling in his desire to get a re- turn match with the champion feather- weight. On Sunday last he drove out to the Casino, the thén training quarters of the latter, to beard the lion in his den. After salutations and hand-shaking Mc- Govern and Erne sifted out of the crowd of idlers and the curious and had a quiet heart to heart talk. Erne, who is his own anager, steered the conversation to a ch between the two. McGovern felt as coming and before Erne had nce to reach the vital question Me- n was there with his Harris answer, ;.:‘w- hibboleth of the McGovern-Harris orces. “Dox’t count me in the game at all, says Terry. “Why, I will fight anybody under the sun, Sharkey or Jeffries if need be, tells me to.”” But there is no need of Terry McGovern fearing that he will be matched with Sharkey, Cor- bett, McCoy, Jeffries, Ruhlin or even the pugilistic shades and departed spirits of " the bodies of some of those fistic gladiators who have outlived thelir pecu- liar kind of usefulness. Harris knows whom to match and whom not_to match with his world-beater. The tory of McGovern's ring career has > ‘strains of Harris running through it from beginning to end. Now that the fighter has won everything he puts his 5ists to, Harris can dictate ferms and con. ditions, and if any outsider imagines for a moment that the manager neglects a chance to squeeze the best of the bargain let bim read the signed articles when a match is being made. McGovern is still the McGovern, as far es fighting ability goes, and the manager puts a high valuation on his principal’s capacity for money-making. It was four years ago when Sam Har- ris first took hold of the “Fighting Ma- chine,” the name that Jim Corbett first bestowed upon the Terrible Terry. Har- ris saw McGovern’s capability as a fight- er. He was a raw lad of fine physique, without much talent as a boxer, but with a spirit for administering punishment that few of the heavy-weights ever displayed. He was then as he is now—a natural fighter. Harris' keen eye saw that this boy would develop. His physique was un- _himself entirely other feather-weight. Mc- Govern’s sturdy frame, his big muscles and his remarkable strength, combined with a readiness to give and to take all a fight ever offered, meant much to Har- ris as he saw the then unknown youns- ster end the fistic career of a man better acquainted with the ways of the ring. From that time on McGovern placed in the hands of Harris. He himse!f realizes that the manager’s shrewdness has done more for him than he could hope to secure by representing himself. At first it was difficult to find fights for Terry, but after a while, through the persistence of the manager good fighters gave him a chance. They all fell- before this fist churner. In the beginning the fighting world looked upon this new comer as something not quite explicable, and laughed at Harris when he asked for matches with the best feath- er-weights of the day. Harris in turn laughed in his quiet way as one after an- other they were all toppled over by Me- Govern, until to-day there is no one in his class left to meet him. It was Harris' shrewdness that won the match for McGovern when Frank Erne was knocked out. Erne agreed to fight at 128 pounds and to put out Mc- Govern in ten rounds. Erne at 128 pounds was a weakened man, incapable of doing himself justice. In his anxiety to reach the weight limit he went one and a half pounds under it. Harris said before the fight. “Erne can’t fight his best at that weight.” Terry thinks about these things and that is why, to him, the managers word is a law of its own. This country has seen some vrizefight managers, Tom O'Rourke and Billy Brady and Parson Davies beinig the most promi- nent. Harris' name will be added to the list of the big successful ones, although he has had but one big man—and he happens to be a small one—under his hands. Har- ris is not like O'Rourke. The oily smooth- ness, the suave, patting manner that fair- ly stuck out on O'Rourke are not com- pcnents of Harris’ personality. He is a quiet, businesslike man, agreeable of man- ner and has many friends. His strongest quality is tact. He goes about the coun- try making friends and is well liked out- side of the class of fight promoters who fail to land Terry for their clubs. This manager has many irons in the fire and the handles of most of them are Terry McGovern. The theatrical venture, the stable of race horses and the primal business of the principal, fighting, have made the firm of McGovern & Harris very opulent. The firm has a senior part- ner who dominates all other members, but rules in such a way as never to pro- vcke a rufile on the equanimity of the subject. The day that the party arrived from the East McGovern thought he would go to the race track. In fact, he said he wanted to go very much. The crowd was gathered around him in the Palace court and an idea suddenly struck Terry that he should see Harris first before deciding upon his individual movements. Harris said: ‘“No: we’ll go to the training quar- ters.” Terry simply said, “All right.” And they went where Harris pointed the finger. like that of any