Note 135 — Chapter X · Fight to Evade Trial.
Reading edition
The attack upon the Grand Jury had, however, been begun the day before, and was progressing in another department of the court even as Ruef and Schmitz were arraigned. Investigation into graft conditions had by this time got beyond the tenderloin. Several minor indictments had been brought. Supervisor Fred P. Nicholas had been indicted for accepting a bribe of $26.10. As chairman of the Public Building and Grounds Committee, the Grand Jury found he had accepted a 10 per cent. commission on $261 worth of furniture purchased for the city. Several witnesses had been indicted for perjury in connection with the graft investigation. That the investigation was going far was now conceded. The defense concentrated to disqualify the Grand Jury. On behalf of Nicholas and Duffy, the Grand Jurors were haled into Judge William P. Lawlor’s court December 5, the day before Schmitz and Ruef were arraigned. The defendants were represented by Frank J. Murphy, who was to play a prominent part in the graft defense. The following taken from the examination of Foreman B. P. Oliver, as printed in the San Francisco Chronicle of December 7, is a fair sample of the nature of the inquiry:
“Did you say to anyone that this is just the beginning of the investigation of municipal corruption?”
“I have said that from the statements I have heard in the Grand Jury room that the corruption of the municipal administration was so great that the present Grand Jury could hardly expect to make any impression upon it. As to when and where I made that statement I cannot tell,” replied Oliver, who proceeded: “As to myself, the mere testimony I have heard in the Grand Jury room has filled me with horror and disgust.”
“Does it fill you with such horror that you believe everyone connected with the administration is corrupt?” asked Lawyer Fairall of counsel for the defense. “I do not believe anyone to be corrupt until he is proved to be so.”
“Could you act fairly and impartially, as a Grand Juror, while having your present feeling of horror and disgust?” “Yes, absolutely so, for I have a conscience.”
“You feel that your conscience would enable you to act fairly?” “I do. If I erred at all it would be on the other side, so as to be sure that I did the accused no injustice.”
This examination went on for several days. The same examination of the Grand Jurors followed in the case of Ruef and Schmitz, and was repeated for the third time on behalf of public-service corporation agents who were indicted later.