The Montgomery advertiser., 1906-03-31
HEARING OF
 C. W. PERKINS Argument in Habeas Corpus Proceedings. JEROME ALLEGES CRIMINALITY Justice Greenbaum Evinees Lively
 Interest in Argument.
 -e- {. Attorney For The Financier Contends That Intent to commit Larceny
 Cannot Be shown In Insu-
 rance Transaction.
 
JEROME ALLEGES CRIMINALITY
Attorney For The Finaneier Contends

the habeaS corpus proceedings Tn the
 case of George W. Perkins, vice pres ident of the New York Life Insurance
 Company, who Is charged in a war
 rant issued by Magistrate Moss with
 the larceny of S4S.702 belonging to the l policyholders of the New York Life
 which he advanced to Cornelius N. Bliss, treasurer of the Republican Ma
 tionaI Committee. were made today before Justice Greenbaum in the State | Supreme Court. Decision was re-
 served Briefs will be filed Monday by
 contending counsel and then Justice
 GSeenbaum will take the matter of the 1 legality of Mir. Perkins's arrest under ladvisement.
 District Attorney Jerome argued for
 the prosecution and former Judge Co.,
 hen and Lewis Delafield appeared for the defendant. Justice Greenbaurn | took the IiveIiest interest in the arr gument and constantly interrupted the
 lawyers with pointed questions. MT. Jerome said that criminal in-
 tent, according to legal authorities. was to appear from all the circum-
 stances of the case
 The question here" he continued, ''is as to the right of Mir. Perkins to
 pay the money of the policyholders to | a political organization for the purpose
 of influencing the results of certain political matters at the polls. This Is very far from being a case where there is an absence of moral guilt or tur- pitude. Shall the officers of a corpora tion or a single officer say, take the money of the policyholders; take your and my money and give 1t to & political party? Act Inherently Wrong.
 T say that such an act Is inherently wrong. whether it Is prohibited by law or not It is contrary to public policy. contrary to public morality and common decency Half of the policy holders may have been Democrats and to take their money to assist the Re- publican party certainly goes to the establishment. of felonious intentr
 Justice Greenbaum askad: If you maintain that this was an Illegal act, under what classification do you put it?"
 MT. Jerome replied: q think that the payment was both illegal and fm- moral. claim that 1t was both and that it was criminal"
 Drawing a parallel in justice of the payment of money to the Republican Campaign Committee, Judge Cohen said that President John A. Mccall of the New York Life Insurance Company had at different times directed the payment of large sums of money for the relief of the Johnstown flood sufferers and for use in a yellow fever epidemic in New Orleans. These payments may have been outside the vested authority of the President. he said, but surely not ille- gal; certainly very far from. criminal.
 Mir. Mccall" he said, held great funds in his possession and he used them for the public benefit He be- lieved sincerely that when he directed the payment of this money to Mir. Per kins, he was acting for the best inter- l nf IA nf lie pany. Outside of his vested authority, 1 perhaps. but not illegal; certainly not criminalp
 It was then explained to the court | that MT Perkins had advanced his | personal funds to MT. Bliss and had | been repaid months afterward by the | New York Life.
 'Ts 1t common sense" asked Judge | Cohen, "to charge a man with having | stolen from another when he Is repaid l his own? MT. Perkins believed he was | doing the best thing for his company, | and it is at his request that make this further statement"
 Judge Cohen argued that none of the | code definitions of larceny applied to | Mir. Perkinss case. When he read the | clause dealing with improper payments | by officers of corporations having con- trol of such payments, Judge Green baum asked:
 Do you mean to claim that a Vice President of a corporation cannot be said to be an officer having control of funds within the meaning of the stat ute; that the only officers so included are those who actually draw the ehccksT
 I think that is the meaning of the | law" replied Judge Cohen.
 ''So narrow as that?' commented Judge Greenbaum
 stT | as sensible as that" rejolned the law yer.
 Justice Greenbaum then asked whether Judge Cohen thought that his Interpretation would shield from con viction of larceny an officer who ac- cepted money wrongfully given to him or paid to him by check by an officer having that authority. Judge Cohen said that if criminal wrong doing was it was covered by other pro- visions of the penal code but he main tained that 1t would not be larceny un- der the code.
 Justice Greenbaum remarked: "A mans motive may be perfectly good and yet he may be guilty of crime" |"
 Judge Cohen replied that there is a distinction between motive and intent, and he declared that criminal intent is essential in proving the commission of a crime.
 During Mir Jerome's reply to the arguments for MT Perkins, Justice asked. Do you maintain that 1t is unlawful to contribute the funds of a company for such a pur- pose as Is covered by this case?"
 The money of the policyholders? Yes" replied the District Attorney.
 Have you any authorities to submit in support of that vIew-any authorities relating to any similar acts, or gifts. to othe- than political organizations?
 q have not We have searched dti- ieently, but this appears to be the first instance of such an issue having arisen. It would appear that your honor will have to pass upon the question as to whether there was a felonious attempt without the assistance of such authori- ties"
 Identifying Documents.
 Gn.raannh March 2n -AEn.L -e