The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-11-18

to discuss whether DIR. Gillette or Fields
committed a crime. DIR. Gillette has been
indicted on another count more susceptlDIe
of proof, and il became necessary in order
To obtain legal evidence against more I'M
portant personages that Fields should De
accepted as a States witness and promised
immunity for the crimes, II any, ne COM
mitted."
ne only crimes susceptible OF COM
mission. Mr.. Jerome says in this connection,
are larceny; forgery in atfirmatlveiy causing
a false entry to be made in books OF account
forgery in emitting to make true entries,
bribery and conspiracy. On the larceny
score the only persons who could nave been
guilty were the chairman of the expendl-
lures committee, one or both the VICE
presidents of the company and Andrew 7.
Fields. There was not the snghtest evl.
dence. Mr.. Jerome says. that Mr.. Olyphant
Appropriated any Of the money to his own
use: in fact, -he displayed at all times a
great willingness to give all the lmoIma5
ton in his power and apparently testlne6
with entire ~franlSness and truttdulness
Fields and DR.. Gillette are disposed OF. as
mentioned before. On the part OF Mr.. Gran
Miss il was shown that he had signed a
voucher for s25. 900. and that single Tact was
wholly insufficient to show the comInisslon
of any larceny" Asto Presluent Mc,uiuS'
There is absolutely no evidence to show
even knowledge on his part OF the existence
of such a fund" On the forgery. score
the criminal law imposed no opileation on
Mr.. Olyphant to keep books with the Morris.
town Trust Company. and as a matter OF
fact he didn't keep any. so he coulon ~
guilty of forgery. As to the bribery charge
Mr.. Jerome says there Is grave reason 10
believe that the money was used &or sucn
purposes. but there is no legal evidence
save the uncorroborated statement oil flelus'
Mr.. jerome says on this:
All persons examined, who had even a
hearsay knowledge OF the uses TO which TINS
fund was put, were strenuous IN asserting
that 90 far rs they knew and as they hau
understood these moneys-as Tar as they
were used to influence legislation OF actions
of public offcers-were employed In a iegltl-
mate way. And so far as Fields is concerned
even were he able to give amounts and dates
and persons to whom money was paid ana
the purposes for which IL was paid, there
would not be evidence In law sur1clent 10
warrant the institution OF a criminal proceed
ing, because of the rule OF law that no con-
yiction can be had upon the testimony OF an
ccomplice, uncorrOborated by other testl-
mony tending to connect the defendant WIN
the commission Of 4 crime.
IL has been found absolutely impossible 70
obtain sAy legal evidence showing that any
portion OF this money drawn from the Morris
town Trust Company was employed Tor the
purposes Of bribery.
THE p ART FIELDS PLAYED
Fields and his activities came in for a
chapter. Mr.. Jerome describes how Fields
got his money from l.. W. Lawrence some
times on fictitious bills for goods never
delivered. This method OF getting money
led to the indictment 81 DR.. Gillette. On
the subject OF campaign contributions
Mr.. Jerome says that prior TO this year
there were no statutes prohibiting corpora
tons from making c~ontributionsf Tor pohtlcai
-zz.o and hn nan find M nrOnf that
the books were fraudulently altered to
conceal such contributions.
FALSE NOT CRIMINAL.
Coming to the fling OF false statements
with the Insurance Department Mr.. jerome
says that there was provision for an annual
statement to be made to the superintendent
OF Insurance upon forms provided by him
and the law required that the statement
be verified by two specified officers OF the
company. The law, however, was not
so framed as 70 require the verification
to be made upon positive knowledge; IL
was sufficient II il was verified TO the best
Of the knowledge, information and belief
OF the persons making the yerihcation.
The report continues:
In more than one instance these reports to
the Insurance Department were untrue;
but ] have been unable TO obtain any legal
evidence which tends to show that the persons
verifying these reports had knowledge OF
the particulars in which the reports were
untrue. Those officers OF the company who
were aware Of the incorrectness Of any re-
port did not verify II and those officers who
did verify IL were unaware Of the incorrect
ness. or. at least. could not be proved 10 have
known Of II. Consequently IL has been i'm
possible TO base any criminal proceedings
upon the incOrrectness Of these reports.
Moreover, the forms provided by the Insur-
ance Department were not such as were
best calculated to guard against these in
correct statements; and. in at least one in
stance. the Mutual Life Insurance Company
was allowed TO report upon a form materially
different from that provided by the Superin-
tendent Of Insurance.
Under the system, Mr.. jerome adds,