PASTOR GIBSON A WITNESS FOR DURRANTThe Handwriting of the

Minister Put inEvidence.

UINLAN'S CHARACTER.

The Witnesses From SonomaCounty Corroborate Bar-

clay Henley.

P.ANT'S GOOD REPUTATION.

Question Miss CunninghamRefused to Answer Taken

Under Advisement.

THE LEANT TRIALINA MINUTE—TOR GIBSON A WITNESS.

Thotr alof Theodore Durrant for the mur-der of Blanche Laraont was adjonrned lastevening until Tuesday morning.

The particular interesting event of yesterdaywas the advent cf Hey. John George Gibson,pastor of Emmanuel Church, on the witness-stand. 15if testimony, however, was not at allsensational; nd was confined to the identifi-cation >\u25a0: certain specimens of his own hand-wrUir.g. Those submitted to him by the de-fense were, he said, very like his own chiro-graph'y, but lie wouldswear positively tononevithem, because they had been out of his dos-icssion for some time. They were, however,admitted as evidence.

At the dictation of Mr.Barnes, witness wroteftshort letter, which was also admitted Inevi-dence. Two sermons, one written before andone .after the the tragedy ofApril 3, were alsoplaced inevidence.Inthe ca»e of Mi?s Carrie Cunningham, the

newspaper woman who refused .to tell from\vhom she received her information for tnearticle about Mrs. Leak, Judge Murphy said hethought the inquiry was not a proper one, butthat ne would take it under advisement untilTuesday.

Witnesses were called to testify that MartinJ. Quinlan's reputation inSonoma County wasnot good.

Other witnesses came to say that the reputa-tionof Theodore Durrant till the time of hisarrest was very good.

THE TWENTY-FIRST DAY.

Pastor Gibson Comes to the Stand.Many Witnesses As to Repu-

". tations— A Busy Day.

A'good deal of headway was made yes-terday in the Durrant trial. The defensehas reached that stase where witnessescome to the stand to say that Durrant'scharacter, or reputation, perhaps, was verygood \ip to the time of his arrest.

This would seem to indicate that the casefor the defense is quite near the close.About all the points of proof offered byDeuprey in his opening statement havebeen made, and it remains now only forthe defendant himself to take the standand tell his version of the events of theafternoon of April 3. Monday being alegal holiday there will be no cession ofthe court until Tuesday next. Then, it is

•expected, Durrant willbe sworn as a wit-ness.Itwould seem now that Miss Carrie Cun-

ningham, the plucky little newspaperwoman who was •uiliiiifrto go to jailrather |than betray information that came to herina professional way, may not go to jailafter all. The court has about come to theconclusion that the question insisted uponby Mr. Dickinson is not a proper one underall the rules of evidence, and has, at any Irate, taken the matter under advisement.

The event of the day, after Miss Cun-ningham's fate was disposed of, was thecoining of Rev. John George Gibson to thewitness chair. His advent created some

nient in the courtroom, bat his tes-timony proved to be entirely without sen-sation.

He was called merely to identify speci-,f his own handwriting. He declined

to do this in a positive manner. Thew.-itiag was "very like" his, he said, but

:iad been out of his possession for::me he could not swear to it. At

Mr. Barnes' dictation he wrote a letter,which waß submitted as evidence. Twosermons of his were also introduced.

Two other points were covered by thedefense during the day. The first was asto the credibility of Martin J. Quinlan, thewitness who testified to seeing Durrantand Blanche Lamont waiting on Bartlettstreet toward the church. Several wit-nesses, headed by Barclay Heniey, sworethat when Mr. Quinlan livedin SonomaCounty, some years ago, his reputation fortruth and integrity wa3bad.

Then came the witnesses to the goodreputation of Durrant. These were AlbertH. Martin, A. M. Davis, James McCul-lough, John H. Sievers, Rev. J. C* Smith.B. R. Keith, Alexander H. McDonald,Donald Mackintosh, George fl. Freier-muth, Dr. W. Z. King, J. A. McCulloughand H. Porter.

Of course, the introduction of this testi-mony paves the way for the' prosecution toshow that Durrant's life was not all that itis thought to have been by these witnesses,ifitcan, and Mr.Barnes says he willmakethe most of his opportunity.

With what due importance the defenseclothes the testimony of Mrs. Leak, whosays she saw Theodore Durrant andBlanche Lamont enter Emmanuel Churchtogether, isapparent from the determinedeffort Mr. Dickinson is making for evenr-mote information that may lead to some-tiin^' upon which Mrs. Leak may be im-peached.

This is admittedly the purpose of thedefense inpressing the question that MissCunnincham says she willnot answer, allthe jails inChristendom to the contrary,notwithstanding.

Miss Cunningham has already said thatinot obtan 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 ifshe had held a conversation with Miss• '.rnningham. And when Mrs. Leak de-nied it, the defense felt that it had laidthe foundation forner impeachment. Theyhud Mins Cunningham's article in view.

Now. itis quite possible that Miss Cun-ningham's information came from a source

y foreign to Mrs. Leak and un-known to her. But, argues the defense, if

< unningham got her informationfrom, Bay a neighbor in the vicinity, wemay be able to show that the neighbor gothis <.r her information from Mrs. Leak, orI in another neighbor who heard itfroma neighbor who got it directly from aneighbor who received the information

:rs. Leak's lips.Even Mr.Dickinson does not deny that

a fishir.tr expedition, but by castingbia line over sr.ch a wide extent of sea, andbaiting it with remote possibilities, hemight, perchance, catch a' clew that wouldlead up to information showing that Mrs,Leak had spoken about her testimony ttf

some other person aside from those namedby the lady. Judge Murphy has alreadysaid that he does not consider such acourse competent under the rules.

THE MORNING SESSION.Miss Cunningham Does Not Go to

Jail-Pastor Gibson IdentifiesHis Handwriting.

"Call Miss Cunningham," said JudgeMurphy, when court convened in themorning.

There was a moment's waitine; then asmall woman walked demurely down theaisle to the witness-sta:id beside JudgeMurphy.

The court—lunderstand, Miss Cunningham,that the question asked you last evening wasas fohows: "From whom, then, didyou obtainthe information?" Iunderstand that you re-fuse to answer the question

"Witness— Yes, sir.The court—Do you still insist upon the ques-

Mr.Dickinson—Yes, sir.The court—lthink It very doubtful that the

question is proper, butIdetermined last even-ing to be safe and err on the side of the defense,if at all.

Now,Ihave given this matter very seriousconsideration. 1am bound to give this defend-ant the fullbenefit ofevery possible point thatcan throw lightupon the subject of this inves-tigation,butIam almost settled in the opinionthat this question is improper.Iwant to commit no error, if possible. This

lady anchor?; her^lf upon what she thinks isnor right under the law. Now the power ofthe court, to punish for contempt is no ar-bitrary power. Ifshe be right ivher positionthe court has no power to compel her toanswer. In the case of ex parte Zehandler,reported in 71 California, the court impris-oned a newspaper reporter for refusing todivulge his information as to an article he had

"Have you any recollection of having writ-ten it?"

"No special recollection. Itlooks very likemy writing."

Dialogues like this occurred with eachspecimen of handwriting exhibited to thewitness. Mr. Gibson remarked repeatedlythat as the specimen had not remained inhis possession he could not swear but thatsomeone else had written them in imita-tion of his own hand.

Nevertheless all the specimens were of-fered in evidence as examples of the hand-writing of the witness— the contents of thepapers not to be taken into consideration.

Witness was shown his own signature ona small piece of paper, but he would notidentify it any more positively than theother specimens.

He was then shown a small piece of pa-per with "George 11. King"on it. He aaidthat it looKed very much as ifhe had writ-ten it. Then another slip with "ProfessorSchwerenstein" on it. The answer was thesame.

"Didyou not write these three names duringyour examination at the Police Court?" askedDickinson, showing the witness three otherslips of paper with the same names written inlead pencil.'

'Irecollect writing the names inink,butnot those inleadpencil."

Mr.Barnes— The question has been answered,but Iwould like the record to show and thewitness to know that he was not examined inthe Police Court in this case.Mr.Dickinson—lwas notaware of that.Mr.Harnes (pointing to where Attorney Mon-

teith sat)—lwould like to ask if Mr. Mo'n«eithis to be called as a witness. Isee him in thecourtroom.

Mr.Dickinson— He willnot be a witness.Mr.Barnes

—What kind of a pen do you use,

Dr. Gibson ?"A Wavcrly pen.""Have you one withyou ?""Yes, sir.""Please sit at the clerk's desk, here, and

write from my dictation."

Witness did as requested and wrote fromthe followingdictation:

"SAMFrancisco, October 4,1895.".Vy Dear Mr.King: Ihave just had a con-

versation with Troressor Schwerenstein. Heinformed me that he has justvisited the resi-

written. He sued out a writ of habeas co-pusand the Supreme Court released him, holdingthat the Superior Court Judge was wrong inimprisoning the witness, because the questionthat the witness refused to answer was not per-Uuent to the issue.

Now, itis a serious matter to deprive a per-son of his liberty, yet the court undoubtedlyhas the right to enforce its rulingsupon anobstinate witness by sending the witness tojailuntil the question is answered. This ques-tioncan, of course, be onlyadmissible for thepurpose of impeaching the witness, Mrs. I^eak.Now,how can it be said that this contradictsor impeaches her? On the contrary, Mins Cun-ningham's testimony rather corroborates thatof Mrs. Leak. 1 am led almost irresistibly tothe conclusion that the question is notproper.Iwill,however, hold the matter in abeyance,and in the meantime if there be any plausioletheory upon which Itcan be argued that thequestion is admissible, Ihope counsel willpre-

sent it to me. As the matter now impressesmeIcould not allow it, and Ifeel that Iamnot straiuiug a point in taking the matter un-der advisement.

Mr. Dickinson— Until when, your Honor?The court—Until Monday or Tuesday. Ibe-

lieve Monday is a holiday.Mr. Dickinson—lunderstand your Honor's

remarks to mean that the question is only ad-missable as impeaching Mrs. Leak. Mrs. Leaktestified quite Inextenso the manner in whichher information was imparted to the prosecu-tion. Now, mightit not be that we can provethioqgh this witness that she had spoken toanother person or to others than those shenamed. Surely that would lay the propergrounds for impeachment. Though this is inthe nature of a fishing expedition, Ihold thatitis a proper one under the circumstances, andthat to uphold the witness in withholding theinformation would be to give itthe characterof aprivileged communication.

The court— You have the fact that Mrs. Leakmade disclosures concerning her testimony totwo pereons— her daughter and to Mrs. Henry.You have a right to call anybody else to showthat she also spoke to them. Iknow of norule of the court that would admit as propersuch a question as this, where the witness hasalready said she had no communication withMr*.Leak, the witness sought tobe impeached.Ifthere is such a ruleIhope counsel will pointit out. Ifhall postpone a rulingon the casetillTuesday morning.Mr. Dickinson— We take exception to the

rulingof the court.The court— But there has been no rulingyet.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 < hurch between October, 1894, andthe latter part of Aprilof this year, wasrecalled.

Mr.Dickinson questioned him consider-ably conorning the ventilation of thechurch. Witness said he op*ned the win-dows and belfry door to get proper ventila-tion.

"When was the last occasion prior to April3that youlit the gas In the church?" asked Mr.Barnes upon cross-examination.

"The Sunday evening before."Arthur Carroll, who has been janitor

of the church since July last, wj»s sworn.He testified that he opened the windowsfor ventilation. Since his incumbency hehad never been upstairs between the ceil-ings, and knew of nobody who had. Hehad not disturbed the ventilators. He re-ceived his keys from C, W. Taber.

Stephen Beverley Nourse, another of thesenior class medical students, was sworn.He said he did not answer for Durrant attue rollcall of Dr. Cheney's lecture. Hisnotes of the lecture were offered in evi-

dence.Then came the Rev. John George Grb-

son, and a sensation was expected, but dianot materialize.

His examination was confined to theidentification of numerous specimens ofhis own handwriting. None of these wouldbe identify positively, because the papershad not been in his possession.

"Well, whet is your best recollection?" per-sisted Mr.Dickinson again and again.

"It look* verylike it,"would be the answer.

deuce of Mrs. Charles G. KoDle, 209 21st St. i(put the number and the Itreet in figures).

"Yours truly,J. George Gibson."Below write:

" -"Mrs. Noble, 209 (in figures) 21st st. (in

figures) Btreet (abbreviated), City."

When the writing was finished Mr. \Barnes offered the paper in-evidence asI"people's e.xhibit 51 on cross-examination

of Dr. Gibson.""Have "you auy sermon or long' writingof

your own that you know to be your own?"asked Mr.Barnes. '\u25a0'\u25a0"\u25a0 :.v- :/»<•-•'.

"Yes, sir." ."'«,' J \u25a0••-' -•',r"Will you bring them into court this after- i

noon?"'

\u25a0

•Lv'.c

'•Why, of course." \u25a0Vl.;-;.j.The court— Better brins specimens of your

writingthat were writtenboth before and afterAprillast."Yes, «lr."Mr. Dickinson then asked witness to

write Mrs. M.N. Noble, printing the mi- itials »nd putting a capital B in the Noble. I

There was some misunderstanding as to :thie meaning of this on the part of the wit- |. ness, but it was finally explained to him |that he must follow the instructions andwrite the name in the manner wanted —

; with the capital B In tne middle of the lNoble. --r.>/

When this wasdone Mr.Dickinson askedwitness ifhe had in his possession thespecimens of his handwriting that werepictured in the newspapers?

Witness inquired whichpublication?•. The date was fixed by Mr.Dickinson as

last Saturday, and witness was instructedto bring those specimens into court in theafternoon, if he could rind them.L.L. Levings, a newspaper reporter, was, called to identify a published interview; withDetective Gibson, in which reference

was made to footprints in the belfry.• Mr.Levings could not identify 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.\u2666

REV. J. GEORGE GIBSON GIVES SPECIMENS OF HIS HANDWWKITINQ.[Sketched by a

"Call

"artist.}

THE AFTERNOON SESSION.Witnesses Testify to the Good Repu-

tation pome by Durrant—Mar-tin J. Quintan's Reputation.

In the afternoon there came severalwitnesses who said that Martin J. Quin-

'lans reputation for integrity and veracity jin Sonoma County some years ago was not Igood.

The first of these wag Barclay Henley, !the ex-Congressman and attorney. He jsaid he had known Martin Quinlan forabout fifteen years and had lived amonghis neighbors in Sonoma County. Quin-lan's reputation was bad, he said.

Upon cross-examination witness saidthat Quintan's reputation had not been Idiscussed very much. He remembered jthat A. Fitzpatrick, a client of his, had re- !cently said that Qtrinlan's reputation was Ibad. Reel Terry had also remarKed to \witness that Quintan's reputation was not jgood.

'"Would yon believe Martin J. QuinlanIunder oath?" asked Mr. Deuprey."Iwouldn't like to say as to that. A witness'credibility is largely governed by his interest I

in the matter."The court— Were the remarks you heard

about Quinlan with reference to his honesty?"No,bir; not as to his honesty."

Ransome Powell was the next witness.He is a resident of Sonoma County. He |said Quinlan's reputation at Santa Ros» Iand thereabouts was bad.

Upon cross-examination witness said hehad a friend who was once in litigationwith Quinlan.

W. A. Reed of Sonoma County did not

know the reputation of Mr.-Quinlan, or ifhe did ithad slipped his mind.

L. J. Hall of Sonoma County did notknow Martin J. Quialan, but had heard ofhim. What he heard was not toQuinlan'scredit, but that was a long time ago.

A. D. Loughlin, a Sonoma County at-torney, said that Quinlan's reputation wasbad.

W. C. Kellog, a newspaper reporter, oncethe editor of a paper in Santa Rosa, hadheard Quinlan spoken of in a way reflect-ing on the latter 's reputation.

The Rev. Mr.Gibson came back to thestand at this point. He brought with himtwo sermons, one written in March andthe other in September last. The onewritten before the tragedy was written bythe left hand.

Witness was shown the blackboard takenfrom the pastor's study in the church andintroduced by the defense. He said thewriting on it was in main verylike hisown. He would not swear to the hand-writing, however, and there were someletters on it that were unlike his and someof the others were badly blurred.

Witness was further sliown a slip of

ftaper that was taken from the churchibrary and asked ifhe had written it.itseemed to be in his handwriting, he

said, but beyond that he would not depose.Then came the witnesses to prove the

good character o! the defendant.P. D. Code was the first of these. Ha

had known Durrant for several years, andbad attended the same church. JJurrant'sreputation for truth and integrity and forpeace and quiet waa good, he said. Hehad not heard itdiscussed.

Albert H.Martin, manager of the GoldenRule Bazaar, said he had known Durrantfor seven or eight years, that Durrant hadvr6rked at the bazaar and that his reputa-tion was good. He had not heard it dis-cussed, but he kept a pretty close accountof his employes.

A.M. Davis was sworn. He said hewas personally acquainted with Durrant,who had worked tor him during the holi-days and at the fire sale at the bazaar. Henever heard Durrani's character discussed,but his reputation was good.

James McCullough said he had knownDurrant eight or nine years and that hisreputation was good. He had never hearditdiscussed prior to th« Bth of April.

John H.Sievers had known Durrant formany years, and had heard his reputationdiscussed about once a month for a periodof ten years, beginning when Durrant wasat school. Jud»e Murphy inquired whatwas the cause of Durrant's character beingdiscussed 30 often, bat witness did notknow.

Rev. J. Curnming Smith knew Durrantseven or eight years and knew that hisreputation was good. He had neverheard it discussed.

B. li. Keith had known Durrant forfifteen years and knew that his reputationwas good, though he had not heard it dis-cussed.

Alexander H. McDonald, who knewDurrant several years, had heard itsaidthat he was a "nice, ruoral young man."He knew that Durrant's character wasgood.

Donald Mackintosh is a neighbor of theDurrant family. After testifying to thegood character of the defendant Mr.Barnes asked him if his wife had notaccompanied Durrant to the Cooper Medi-cal College upon one occasion.

Witness replied in the affirmative."Didnot Mrs. Mackintosh make a statement

to you concerning that occasion?""Ido not recall that she did. Not in parti-

cular.""Uidn't she make a remark about something

that happened then?""Ithink not."Mr.Barnes then asked that the court in-

struct the witness to hold himself inreadi-ness to be summoned as a witness for thepeople.

Then Mr. Dickinson elicited the addi-tional information that Mrs. Mackintosh'strip to the college with Durrant was dur-ing a visit to that institution of a conven-tion of physicians and surgeons.

George H.Freiermuth said he had knownDurrant for several years, that his reputa-tion was good, and that about four yearsago he had heard itdiscussed with creditto 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 tue Durrantfamily. He had never heard Durrant'sreoutation discussed.

J. A. McCullough said he was a brotherof Draughtsman McCullouch, who drew

j the diagrams in the case for the defense,iHe was very intimate with Durrant, but,had not subscribed any money for the de-fense. He saia Durrant's character wasgood, but lie never heard itdiscussed.

H. Porter, an old schoolmate of Dur-rant, said he had heard the defendant'!reputation discussed at the college, andthat it was always spoken of withcredit toDurrant.

M. Vogel, the husband of Mary Vogel,:who testified for the people that she sawIDurrant in front of the Normal School

waiting for Blanche Lamont, was the lastwitness for the week.

Mr. Deuprey asked him what newspapershe took.

He subscribed for The Call, he said,and on Sunday bought all the papers. Hedid not, however, he Baid, very positively,have much time to read anything morethan the headlines. Both he ana Mrs.Vogel were very busy and read the papersbut casually. At night, after supper, heusually went straight to bed, for he mustbe up at 3 o'clock in the morning.

On Sunday he sometimes went fishing,or went to the park with his wife. Stie ,had her housework to do, and found butscant time to read.

"How long has Mrs. Vogel been wearingglasses?" suddenly asked Mr.Deuprey.

"She has never used glasses, that 1know of.""Isn'th?r eyesicrbt bad?". "It*very good.""Did you have an interview with a man

named Green infront of your residence on the27th of September?"

"Not thatIknow of?"Mr. Deuprey then described Mr.Green

indetail and witness said he didremembertalking to such a person.

"Didn't you say to him that you bought allthe papers?"

•*>o,tir.""Didn't you tellhim that both you and your

wife read all the testimony in the DurranttrialTery closoly?""Inever said any such a thing at all."There were no more witnesses in attend-

ance, and the court adjourned tillTuesdaymorning.

STILL AFTER DR. GIBSON.Durrant's Attorneys Seeking to

Cast Further SuspicionUpon Him.

The attorneys for Dnrrant are deter-mined, ifpossible, to compel Miss CarrieCunningham, the Chronicle reporter, todivulge the secret of the source from whichshe obtained the information from whichthe story of Mrs. Leak and the testimonyshe would give, was written ana published,itis the theory of the defense that althoughthe story is accredited to the police, it wasin reality furnished by Rev. J. GeorgeGibson.

Durrant's attorneys will therefore makea most strenuous "effort to carry theirpoint and compel the lady to tell whereshe got her information. Then, shouldthey succeed, and she Bhould say, as thodefense believes she willif she speak atall, that the story was given her dv Key.J. George Gibson, the implications thathave already been made against thateentleman will be as nothing compared towhat the defense willseek to imply.

For if they develop the fact that Dr.Gibson gave out the story they willadvance _by implication the theory thathe prevailed upon Mrs. Leak to believeshe saw Durrant and Blanche Lamontenter the church yard together.

Dr. Gibson has repeatedly denied thathe had any connection with the story.From his manner he is apparently littleconcerned as to any unpleasantness thatmay arise from implications drawn fromanything Miss Cunningham may tell.

There was a matter of singular interestin connection with the afternoon proceed-ings of the Durrant trial yesterday. Itwas during the taking of testimony to im-peach the evidehceof Martin Quinlan thata number of witnesses from SonomaCounty were called to testify concerninghis character. Among them was AlReed,who took his place on the witness-standand in response to the questions of Gen-eral Dickinson gave Quinlan a very badcharacter.

The singular interest attaching to theincident is that Keed, in company withJohn Bailiff,walked into the law office ofJames Z^oon at Santa Rosa one day in1886 and killed him for heving betrayedBailiff's wife, who is Piied's sister, andKoon was the friend and intimate asso-ciate of Quinlan when the latter was aresident of Santa Rosa. Reed and Bailiffwere tried for the killing of Noon, andspeedily acquitted on the ground that itwas justifiable.

THE B`NAI B`RITHSCHOOLFire Wardens Say It Must Not

Be Held In the Eddy-street

Building.

is Claimed That Economical Mem-bers Desire the School

Abolished.

Some discussion has been arousedamong the members of the IndependentOrder of B'nai B rithby the action of theBoard of Fire Wardens in this City. Theorder possessed, until recently, a schoolfor imparting a general course of secularand religious instruction to Jewish chil-dren whose parents are not members ofany synagogue, and who are, therefore,not entitled to tuition at the ordinarySabbath-schools.

The school was held in the basement ofthe B'nai B'rith Hall on Eddy street. TheBoard of Fire Wardens recently reportedthat this building is unfit for use as aschool. Itwas asserted, and itis not de-nied, th&t there is but one exit and thatdark, narrow and inconvenient. In caseof a panic the position of the 250 childrenattending the school endeavoring to getinto the street by means of one stairwaywould be extremely perilous.

The pupils of the school have been re-moved to a building on Mission streetpending some action on the part of thecommittee. Itis, however, charged on thepart of some prominent members of theorder that there exists a clique which isanxious to do away with the school on thescore ofeconomy. This would be a savingof $250 per annum. It is openly statedthat these members have used their in-fluence with the fire officials to get thebuilding on Eddy street condemned as apreliminary to abolishing the school alto-gether.

In the interim prominent members inB'nai B'rith 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 fora more general dissemina-tion of the principles of Judaixm in Sun Fran-cisco, especially among tne children of onrcommunity. We are once more practicallywithout & school which may bo attended bythe children of our co-religionists whose con-tracted means prevent them from becomingmembers of congregations, it is indisputablethat we owe that class some consideration.

The recent action of the halldirectors of thoB. B. Hall has practically given the death-blow to the school, for some years in charge ofthe B'nai B'rith order. We must begin anew,under more general auspices, to found a per-manent school of religion for the poor inourmidst. With that object inviewIaddress thiscommunication to you as one of a committeeof thirty-six gentlemen whom Ihave invitedfor ft general discussion of the subject. Itrustyou will honor me with your attendance onnext Monday evening, October 7, at 8 o'clock,at the vestry-room of the Temple Emanu-El.Fraternally tnd respectfully yours,

Jacob Voobsangkr.

Itits expected that after the meetingmentioned has been held some practicalresult willbo arrived at.. I .*\u25a0*\u25a0*

~

llival Window-Cleaners.The men who go about downtown with pails

and bamboo ladders cleaning plate-glass win-dows are at present engaged ina vendettaworthy of the Tennessee Mountain?. How itwill end no man foresees, but the industryjust now suggests the flowicg: of more bloodthan window-washing water. One organiza-tion isGerman, the other Italian, and war tothe knife is threatened. Amanifesto sent outyesterday by one of the rivals advises "allgoodcitizens to beware aud give the Mafia window-cleauori and stiletto-wielders a wide berth andtender your patronage to the only reputablegentlemen in this business with unblemishedcharacters." The literary bureau of its rivalasserts in blood-curdling language that itscompetitors form "a conglomerated aggrega-tion of uncongenial, unreliable and unkomptpersonifications of humanity," and calls onthe public to distinguish "between skilled andamaieur manipulators in the art of window-polishing."

Feast of St. Francis.

Church, Army and Valencia, streets. The cele-brant, deacon and Birtwleacon of the mass wereDominican fathers. Father T. Caraher, Mis-sion San Jose, preached the panegyric of thesaint In English, and Father Mueller, S. J., inGerman.

Dr. Lilienthal'« Will.Dr.James E. Lilienthal, who died on Septem-

ber 27, left a $35,000 estate. By a willfiledyesterday the property Is bequeathed to AlbertLilieflth&lof New York and PhilipN.Lilion-thal, Je*se W. Linenthal and Ernest K.Lilien-thal of this City.

JOHN W. MACKAYIS SUED.Made a Defendant in El

Dorado County MiningLitigation.

A CONSPIEACY IS CHARGED.

Joel T. Smith, John D. Bancroftand Robert M.Green Ask Heavy

Damages.

John W. Mackay was made a defendantin a $200,000 mining suit, involving a valu-able group of mines inEl Dorado County,that was riled in tho United States CircuitCcurt yesterday. No service of the papersin the case has been had and the complainthas not as yet been made a part of therecord of the court.

The plaintiffs are Joel T. Smith, amin-ingman from Montana, John D. Bancroftand Robert M. Green, and the defendantsEdward Bind, Leonard Reeg, A. Head,John W. Mackay, John Doe and RichardRoe.

The complaint seta forth that on May20, 1805, Smith made an agreement withthe defendants Bind and Reear to buy anumber of mines for $60,0(50. The proper-ties included were the Blue Gouge, Flem-ingExtension, Procop, Rocky Point, Westand Park, all in the Pleasant Valley min-ing district. A half interest in the Bo-nanza mine and the water rights belongingto the entire group were included inthepurchase. Smith was to pay $1000 on July5, 1895. $11,500 on August 1,1885, $7500 onSeptember 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 theoperation of the properties to be appliedto the purchase price.Itwas also stipulated that the agreement

to sell should De dependent upon a bondexecuted on May 6, "1895, by defendantsReeg and Bind agreeing to "sell the prop-erties to plaintiff Bancroft for $55,000,$30,000 of which was to be paid before July1. 1895. and $25,000 on or before September1, 1895. Later the original agreement wasmodified to allow Smith to pay $1000 down,$15,000 on September 1,$22,000 0n December1and $22,000 on March 1, 1896.

Then Smith took Bancroft and Greeninto the deal as equal partners and a pur-chaser for the entire group was looked for.In the meantime a verbal extension of thetime for making the payments was ob-tained from Bindana Reeg.

Negotiations were opened with a num-ber of capitalists looking for investments,and John W. Mac&ay was finally ap-proached ana offered the group for $250,000cash. He employed experts to go over theproperty, including the defendant, Head.

The complaint goes on to say that onSeptember 15 the experts visited the claimson which the plaintiffs had already ex-pended a large 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 ofthe mines, ignoring those who had bondedthem, and entered into an agreement bywhich the properties were to be transferredto Mackay, through his agents, for a sumseveral thousand dollars less than the priceoriginally asKed Mackay by the plaintiffs.

This arrangement is said to be on theeve of consummation, and the court isasked to grant an injunction preventingReeg and Bind from selling the mines toMackay and compelling the latter to ceasenegotiations.

The plaintiffs claim that through the ac-tions of the defendants in refusing to keepto the orginal agreement they have beeninjured in the sum of $200,000 and judg-ment is asked for that amount.

Defendant Mackay is said to be at themines, which are considered among themost promising in El Dorado County.

W. 6. Scott is attorney for the plaintiffsand will be assisted by H. N. and R. P.Clement as counsel.

JUDGE BELCHER'S WILL.Diftposal of the Eminent Lawyer's Es-

tate, Which Ig Valued at8100,000.

Ex-Judge William C. Belcher, who diedin this City on September 1, owned anestate that is valued at $100,000. His willwas 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 beheld in trust for the following purposes:

To close up all the business of the estate; topay to the testator's aunt, Phcebe VV.Brooks,.*<>OO a year; to pay his sister, Mary J. Belcher,$50 a month as long as she lives: to pay hissister, Charlotte M. Whitney, $600 a year forthe education of her nephew, William B. Whit-ney: to pay the expenses ot thd education ofhis niece, Ann Belcher, at Wellesley or anyother college, provided that such expensesshall not exceed $WK) a year; to pay to AnnB«leher, at the completioa of her education,$8O00 ; to Alice Belcher and Mattie Belcher,nieces, $8000 each; to pay to William B.Whitney, at the completion of his education,.*8OOO: to Edward Belcher, another nephev/,¥8000 ; to Mamie and Bessie Rogers, nietjes,$5000 each ;to pay the income of $10,000 tothe testator's sister, Charlotte; to pay MinnieA.and Hattie Taggart, $5000 each.

The Marysville library is to receive$1000 and the Gaysville (Xrt.) library booksand $10,000. I. S. Belcher, a brother, isto hold the testator's interest in the familyhomestep.d at Stockbridge, Vt., for a sisterand her husband. The residue of the es-tate willgo to the University of Vermontfor the purchase of books.

California Quartet at St. John's.The well-known California Quartet will

sine at St. .John's Presbyterian Church to-morrow morning. The quartet has beenengaged for services in that church for theensuing six months. It will doubtless provean attractive feature of that popular place ofworship. ________________

BACKACHE.From the Press, New York City.

Few people have suffered more frompain inthe back than Mrs. Lillle B. Newell of No.2313 Second avenue, New York City. Forseveral yt>ar*she was so afliicted with this dis-tressing malady that she wan hardly able toget around, and couid do little to caro for herchildren, which made ncr suffering all theharder to bear. Her husband, Charles New-ell, who is a well-known New York optician,tried in every way to find a remedy for hiswife, but no medicine seemed to hare thepower to remove her pain.

Mrs. Glynn,a sister of Mrs. Newell, is a pro-fessional nurse, and was familiar with thesymptoms of her sister's sickness. Mm. New-ell was away on a visit when a reporter calledupon her, but Mrs. Glynn, who lives at No. 416East One Hundred and Twentieth street, toldthe story of her sißter's recovery.

Adoctor was called when Mrs. Newell's con-dition became serious and he prescribed smallpink pills, which,ina short time, relievea thewoman's pain as no other medicine had done."After a while," Mrs. Glynn told the reporter,"Vfdlearned that the medicine the physicianwas giving my sister was nothing more thanDr. Williams' Pink Pi'.ls for Pale People.Knowingby experience how excellent a reme-dy these pills were, Mrs. Neweil bought someat a drugstore and continued taking them.The effect was most gratifying, for in sixmonths my sister was perfectly well, and thepain inher back was nothing more than anunpleasant memory. Both she and Ihaverecommended the Pink Pills to other people,who have not failed to find them all that isclaimed. All the doctore my sister had beentreated by, before taking the pills,had doneher no apparent good."

I'ink Pills are sold inboxes (never in looseform, by the dozen or hundred, and the publicis cautioned against numerous imitationssold in thrs shape) at 50 cents a box, or sixboxes for $2 50, and may be had of all drug-gists, or direct by mail from Dr.Williams'Medicine Company, Schenectady, N. V Theprice at which these pills are sold makes acourse of treatment inexpensive as comparedwith other remedies prmedical treatment.

THE SAIS FRANCISCO CALL, SATURDAY, OCTOBER 5, 1895.

NEMF TO-DAT.

A : IGREATPAPER._ ;

TO-DAY'S ;

News Letter.It's as good a3 the play to read

\u25a0r "Pleasure's Wand."The incisiveneas of the editorials \u25a0

•. and the vigorous manner events aredealt with willplease you.

Every department is brimmingover with delightful personalities.

Take a copy home and makeyour wife, your sweetheart andyourself happy.

FOR A DIME.

BROOKS'KUMYSS

Has many imitators— no equals.Made from pnre Jersey Farm milkAud cream only. Contains V!5per cent ,More nutriment than any other.Willcure indigestion and stomachAilments. HOMCEOPATAIC PHARMACT,

" ;119 POWELL STKEET.

The powers that be are the powers of HadyanA purely vegetable preparation, Itstops all losses,cures Prematnreness, LOST MANHOOD,Consti-pation, Dizziness, Falling Sensations, :NervouaTwitchingof the Eyes and other pares.

Strengthens, invigorates and torn-* tne entiresystem. Itis as cheap as any other remedy.

HUDVAS cures Debility,Nervousness, Emis-sions and develops and restores weak organs:pains in the back, losses by day or nightstoppedquickly. Over 2000 private indorsements.v •Prematureuess means impoteacy In the firststage. Itisa symptom' of seminal weakness and,barrenness. It can be stopped in twenty days bythe use of Htidyan.

-udyan costs no more than

'

any other remedy.-Send forcirculars and testimonials.Blood diseases can be cured. Don't yon goto

hot springs before you read our "Blood Book."Send for this book. Itis free.

HUDSON MEDICAL INSTITUTE.Istockton, Market and KIIUSt«.,

-San Francisco, Cal.

LIPO TAI JR., /TVChinese Tea and Herb Ls J \u25a0

Sanitorinm, p^HfNo. 727 Washington St., \X ,5 \u25a0'

San Francisco,. Cal. \ir*- WCor. Brenham Place, abova faC^g> /A

the plaza. /Jfo**.'Office Hours: 9to 12, "-^1to *aud 5 to 7. Sun-

'day, 9 A.M.to V4M.

'

LiFoTai Jr., son of the famous LiPoTai, lias taken his father's business,'

Iand Is, after eleven years* study in

China, fully prepared to locate and

treat alldiseases.' '• -~- • :

GEORGE H. FULLER DESK CO./X^&F-jp&ffl \u25a0\u25a0!» the' Place to Boy

JsBk DESKS, CHAIRS' &^wp^wisW»^j^i«wj'.^^nßFj& '' And -*-11 Kinds of

MHaltma FURNITURE• TflSfl&i^jj 638-640 Mission St.

NEW WESTERN HOTEL.

KEARNY AND WASHINGTON STa-RB-\u25a0 modeled and renovated. KING,WARD <fe CO.;European plan.

'Rooms 50c to $160 per day, &l; to 98per week, $8 to 930 per month:, free ba'.ha:

hot and cold water every room; tire grates ia tveqr[ room; elevaior runs all olgUu

ChildrenTo=Day

We are going to surprise you. We haveoffered many astonishing Bargains inChil-dren's Clothing but TO-DAY is the dayof days; TO-DAY we snail outdo all fdr-mer efforts.

53.50.A new line, jnst opened, of

Reafer suits, in blue, brownand gray, with wide braidedcollar. Handsome: somethingany boy willbe proud of.

151.50.I

Short pants suits, double-breasted, neat plaids. Wewere astonished that we could Isell them for that, and youwill be too.

55.00.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 ourstore. Everything as light "as if it wereoutdoors.

H. ROMAN & CO.,The New Daylight Store,

COR. MARKET AND FIFTH STREETS,Open To-night tillIIP. n.