St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1892-09-29
GRANTED A RESPITE.
Peck and His Stenogpapher
Appear to Answer to the
Indictment.
Their Attorney Claims That
the Grand Jury Was
Prejudieed,
Also That the Proceedings
Were in the Nature Of
Persecution.
The Judge Puts the Time for
Pleading Over to
Monday.

ALBANY, n. Y, Sept. 2S.-Labor Com
missioner Peck and his stenographer,
Ebert Rodgers, appeared in the court
of sessions this afternoon at 3 clock,
the time set for them to plead to the
indictments found against them for de-
stroying public records. District At
torney Eaton and his assistant, Mark
Cohen, for tile prosecution, Edward J.
Meegan for the defense, Commissioner
Peck and large number of interested
spectators were present.
Mr.. Meegan opened the arguments,
asking that the indictment be sent back
to the police court so the case can be
regularly and legally tried. In support
of this contention he read an affidavit
of Mr.. Peck and Mr.. Rodgers, rehears-
Ing their arraignment in the police court
and their subsequent indictment by the
grand jury on the same charge, and say
ing:
1.-The secret action in the police court
and before the grand jury on the part
of the district attorney was prejudicial
to depOnents. Deponent was prepared
to establish his entire innocence when
examined before Police Justice Gut
mann, but he was
Denied That Right,
and an indictment was found, as de-
ponent believes, to embarrass him in
his defense and to disgrace him in the
public eye, with the view to effect re-
suits. That. by reason of this secret
action, SO covertly done by the district
attorney, he has been deprivedof his chal-
lenge to the grand jurors who found
such indictment. and verify believes
that that he had some ground of chal-
lenge against majority of the
grand jurors; that it is unjust
to permit an Indictment to stand against
him when 80 found by incompetent and
improper grand jurors; that deponent
believes If said grand jury were net
moved by prejudice and melted. in
famed and biased minds, no indict-
ments would have been found against
deponent."
Mr.. Meegan then began his argument
to show that the position taken by Mr..
Peck aud Mr.. Rogers in their affidavit
was upheld by the law. He said:
1.-The finding of the indictments was
clearly irregular, while the same nat
ter on which the indictments were
found was pending on examination in
the police court. The action of the dis
trict attorney in presenting the case to
the grand jury was in the nature of
An Act of Persecution.
"The case should not have been pre-
seDted to the grand jury, under the cir
cumstanceS, unless to save the case from
the statuteEof limitations. The court
should not sanction such persecutis5h,
and should not allow the enemies some
of them being in high position, of Mr..
Peck to use the courts to vent their spite
against him." Mr.. Eaton said the legal
points madeby Mr.. Meegan were summed
up In his eloquence. The charge
against MIR. Peck was case which the
grand jury could competently consider.
The indictment should stand. He said
proceedings in court in this case had not
been regular. There could be no ques-
ton than the grand jury as an indie
pendent body could inquire into every
matter brought to its notice.
Mr.. Meegan replied, saying the au-
thorities he had cited showed that no in
dictment ought to be allowed to stand
in case like this, and that the matter
should be sent back to the police court,
where proper examination can be had
Judge Clute said that the points raised
by the defense would necessitate him
examining the authorities bearing on the
question, end he therefore named Mon
day morning as the time for the defend
ants to plead the indictments in case
they were not quaShed,