The actual work of drawing a jury to try Ruef began on March 13,[209] eight days later than the date originally set for trial. The State was represented by District Attorney Langdon, Francis J. Heney and Hiram W. Johnson. At the defense end of the table with Schmitz and Ruef were Attorneys Joseph C. Campbell, Samuel M. Shortridge, Henry Ach, Charles A. Fairall and J. J. Barrett. But it developed that one of the four citizens drawn for jury service was not in the courtroom. The defense objected to proceeding during the absence of the venireman. The hearing was accordingly postponed. Because of one technical obstruction and another, the work of impaneling the trial jury was delayed until April 2. Even after that date there were interruptions, but the work of securing the jury[210] went on until May 13, when the twelfth man to try Ruef was accepted. But while Ruef was making this brave fight in public to head off trial on the extortion charge, behind the scenes he was imploring representatives of the Prosecution to grant him immunity from punishment in return for such confession as he might see fit to make. As early as March 20, Ruef sent word to Heney through Burns[211] that he was willing to make confession, provided he were given immunity from punishment for all crimes which he had committed or in which he had participated. Heney refused absolutely to consider any arrangement which involved complete immunity for Ruef. Negotiations on the basis of partial immunity followed.[212] Heney, on the ground that he did not trust any of Ruef's lawyers, refused to discuss the matter with them, but stated that he would meet any lawyer in whom he had confidence to negotiate terms of partial immunity, provided that Ruef's representative were permitted: (1) To give the names of Ruef's accomplices who would be involved by his testimony. (2) To give the general nature of the offenses in which the various accomplices were involved. (3) To be prepared to assure Heney that Ruef's evidence against his accomplices could be corroborated, and was sufficient to sustain a conviction. Ruef at first appeared to be well satisfied with the plan. He sent for a list of San Francisco attorneys, and set himself enthusiastically to the work of selecting a list of the names of attorneys to be submitted to Heney. But he failed to make a selection, urging all the time to Burns that Heney accept Henry Ach. Ruef's insistence that he deal with Ach convinced Heney that Ruef was not acting in good faith, and he refused to yield to Burns's urging that he give way to Ruef in this particular and accept Ach as Ruef's representative.[213] Under Ruef's temporizing, negotiations dragged until April 2, the day that, Ruef's technical obstructions in the main set aside, his trial was to be resumed before Judge Dunne. On that day, a new actor appeared in the person of Dr. Jacob Nieto, a Jewish Rabbi of some prominence in San Francisco.