Show U I wy EV DARES HIS UIS t TO ADMIT CALHOUN GAVE BRIBE The he Attorneys Drop Legal k Phraseology and TalK Plain English V S. S SAN SM FRANCISCO April Patrick Calhoun's attorneys were iere Invited today tollay ty by b the tie pra prosecution to make maTte legal ac acknowledgment ac- ac nt that thaL he United IM for 01 or the tine overhead trolley permit The invitation In which was not J was extended by 13 Francis J. J IJ lIncy ne who promised cd to give the s fley for Cor the defenso defense all the th they y lOu ought ht In an effort to prove pro a JK ing conspiracy on the part of or James Tamos I L. L jj h l' l and the tine other supervisors of or I thc tb h board Dispensing with the usual Je legal al forms I and P language Mr 11 Honey and Karl l-ari flog Rog I. I er ers discussed df In plainest terms the is- is ue tue e to be submitted to the thc Jury when 15 1 I tb the e long Jong trial Is ended Hi r- r HO NI was 1111 attempting to draw I rom from G Coleman who was wa-c called cJ a A A. witness JJ a yesterday an admission that j je Jle agreed with to I 1011 1014 ij up tho the franchise unless i was p pAid ld The rhe attorney for or th the tho thoc c ar argued ars iod that tha t Buch BUh evidence was wan a is uJ l tending to show shots that the lup r were ere engaged eng in a a. J. J blackmaIl blackmaIl- la I Conspiracy I Do you Ou hold hoM such roof proof will COnlU lute I a a. legal a defense Inquired Jud o r. r 1 I I do not said Mid Mr fingers rs but hut I id 14 that It constitutes a II tact fact that the ry Ix ought to know p well weil paid said i cr Mr Mj Honey but as UI tent un hi ro no cl claim cam tm hero here that these super euper- up r- r rs blackmailed blackmail d tho the United Railroads S tad Id f as such Buch a defense will III involve an sal ad- l that this mon money was paid I 1 will ti t t to evidence e offered o to support t that ha t ory I 1 have havo heard no acknowledgment nt Id I'd nt 1 but I money WitS Was paid b by tho tue defendant tin to II if i It f t the th 11 purpose of or tho the defense such a an avowal a l s o-s basis for tor ban of ot conspiracy c we will I let t down th and u withdraw My objection to any J you OU eu may choose lo to nal aJ In coti- coti course of oC his cross ero examination 1 Coleman lemon w Was led by Mr 11 Rogers to re- re again the tho circumstances under underpaid he was waG paid mone money in th the various 1 lons ons in which ho he a admitted coin coin- Tr r Witness lId called the he attention of oC tho the hi to fo alleged discrepancies tl to tho t testimony t suit aTHI coleman ol contrary established h Galla- Galla bla d nl and argued over the proba- proba Ohi ot of hl hI former utterances On Onto appealing to tho the court he tas It If that WAS given by m me I misled b by counsel redIrect e examination con- con Yer I j h by Mr fr Hency WI was UI unusually seYer sc- sc li n Its was y forc forced d Coleman to admit that thal t Cute fr JI t to on a Pledge to ret re- re t that I IT h to lo existing corporations s a. a hod t had i Bb e been advised Pal trolley system st m Increased insurance and u r on made mado additional proon pro- pro the against t fire r and that t ho he ha lied had up ill Urno tt th the United railroads secured ed f ie 4 permit Jit consistently n tI voted oLed to remove remo and anni O Overhead ad- ad wires Irl and id to oreo ot of the thc underground conduit tern PUm |