The Birmingham age-herald., 1906-03-24
Justice O'SuIIiVan Takes ODpO-
 site VIsW from Jerome
JURY WANTS INFORMATION
And Justice Gives Them His Opinion About Campaign Contributions On the Part of Corpora
 ton Officials.

New York, March 23.-lt the grand Jury which is Investigating some of the re- cent legislative investigations reaches the conclusion that contributions of the insurance company funds to political cam paign committees were made with intent to deprive or defraud the true owners of his property, it must find that larceny was committed.
 This opinion was expressed today by Justice OSullivan in the court of general sessions in answer to a presentment on the subject submitted to him by the grand jurors. Judge OSulivan added that it was not within the province of the court to say whether or not there was intent That is question which the jurors must determine for themselves. from all the facts and circumstances in the case. He charged the jury to make a thorough in- vestigation into the facts and to place the responsibility for such crimes If they find that crimes were committed.
 You are not to go seeking for shelter as an excuse to avoid an unpleasant duty he said.
 Opposite to Jerome's Contention.
 This opinion Is in effect directly op- posite to one on the same subject which was given by District Attorney Jerome several days ago. Mir Jerome, in his brief. which was submitted to Justice Osullivan, held that there was no grounds for prosecution of any insurance official in connection with the campaign contributions, taking the ground that no n ..n... Tr.a O'Sullivan agreed with the contention of the district attorney that intent must have been present to constitute the crime of larceny, but declares that the question whether or not there was intent is a ques- ton which is yet to be determined.
 Mir. Jerome was in court today, and when Judge O Sullivan had delivered his opinion the district attorney asked the grand jury to remain, as he desired 10 ad- dress them on the subject in question: He declared that Judge O'Sullivan had mis- conceived the subject which he had con- sdered and that if the court held to it's opinion it would be the duty of the grand jury to return indictments against George W. Perkins former vice president of the New York Life Insurance company. for larceny. and against George B. Cortelyou. chairman and Cornelius N. Bliss, treas urer of the republican national commit tee, as receivers of stolen goods.
 Offers to Submit Affidavits.
 Mir. Jerome informed Judge O'Sullivan that if he would sit magistrate he would submit affidavts to the acts as committed by George w. Perkins. and would ask for a warrant for his arrest. He added that in event of such a war rant being issued a writ of habeas corpus would follow. and the case would be taken to the highest courts, where the district attorney would retain Alton R. Parker as special counsel Judge OSullivan de- clined to grant the warrant. giving as his reason that the question at issue should be passed on by the grand jury.
 OSulIvans Words to Grand Jury.
 In his charge to the graund jury in reference to questions, they put to him, Judge O'Sulllvan said: Your questions infer the intent in the payment of a political assessment and you wish to know whether that constitutes a crime. Your questions infer whether the intent was good or bad before inquiring of all the circumstances surrounding 1t. This question comes under section 520 of the penal code which expressly declares that to commit the crime of larceny there must be intent. It Is not within the province of this court to say whether 
 from all the facts.
 Was 1t an honest transaction actuated by honorable motives or was 1t an act under artfiee, disguise and concealment?
 From these facts you will get the char acter of intent.
 "The law says that one who falslfes the accounts of a corporation is guilty of forgery. If you find such evidence in this case you make that as evidence of intent.
 Under section ell officers, agents or employees of a corporation who makes false reports of affairs of a corporation are guilty of a misdemeanor. You may consider that in relation to criminal in- tent It is not within the province of the grand jury to speculate how crime has been avoided but rather how 1t has been committed.
 T cannot Impress on you too strongly that self gain Is not necessary to consti- ute the crime of larceny"
 Question of Reasonable Doubt.
 Judge OSullivan referred to the ques- tion of reasonable doubt and concluded: {:
 You are not to go seeking for shelter as an excuse to avoid an unpleasant duty.
 Contributing to a political party Is not necessarily a crime. It may be and you may presume it to be an innocent trans action. Individuals and possibly certain corporations may contribute to political parties as they may contribute to any thing else and be guiltless; but they may contribute in such manner as to render the transaction criminal. You are to in- quire if in this case an act prohibited by law has been committed with the intent