The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1906-05-26
PERKINS ADsOLVED OF CRIME.
fgesfGtfs RTrIsges Stssft ~
ftNetlNV NgFTs
tp@a'Hs Sstswss's aytairui eaWssWt'eW fbse
tHess Wss ~ eesuass,s fefeas snt ~
eatse pspteaes N nefra Ne suvv ,ea
~ sfsWsy essa ~ seugHep tWWstT

'fa ~ - y W. fFNNNHN ~ y. w
s~one'ibuHinR %crfpumslru f'rd. ~ . csra.
paian cfmBittesl
fhe drcisioB frls tsss ffrn @t,tSiy
Ocures " Perkins, tho forucs vice.prssl.
dsnf ~ mo New York late ~lnauvancn Casp.
pahy Tho Appellate Count holds IN avs
separate hut cunouprins orinlous that W.
Perkins cummii,sI NJ erlme. and had No
criminal lntent, when he, under the dlreo.
ton u President Nc'ail NJ he New YORK
Life. paid tls,OgO odd 40 The ~company'a
contribution IN ,hs Republican canpalgn
committees In leOl
The repeatedly eRpFes-sd otdbion n
District Attorney jerome that s,ioh oon.
,ributions we're not criminal In themselves
IL amply borne out by the Ave opinions
rendered, M jerome commended at irst
that, while such contributions might he
inimical 10 public policy, yet there wa
such q contribution illegal In the Perkins
case, however, which he regarded ~ u test,
he advanced arguments to show that there
WAS criminal intent.
Supreme Court Justice Ureenbaum held
that UGH contributions were an illegal
diversion Of the ooinpany's funds and to
"a certain extent criminal. and refused to
uphold the habeas corpus writ which Mr..
Perkins sued out through his counsel.
l.. l.. Delafeld. when he was arrested on
a charge Of grand larceny in connection
with this payment of ~, 900 odd to tho
Republican campaign committee In 1904.
II will be recalled that Mr.. Perkins paid
this money himself and later was reim-
bursed by the insurance company.
h five opinions rendered yesterday
by the Justices OF the Appellate Division
uphold Mr.. Jerome in every contention
that he made when he applied, directly
and indirectly, to Recorder Gof and Gen.
eral Sessions Judge O'Sullivan for advice
on the question Of criminality in such CAM
paign contributions. IL Is understood that
he viii, as the prosecuting official Of this
county. carry an appeal from the Appel
late Divisions decision TO the Court OF
Appeals, but lawyers who read the opinions
handed down yesterday could only comment
that it seemed a waste of public money
to carry up on appeal a matter 20 evidently
predigested and fundamental in its appli-
cation to the law and the Constitution.
The Justices who heard the arguments
in the Perkins case were George l.. Ingra-
ham, John Proctor Clarke, Frank C. Laugh
lin, Chester B. Mclaughlin and Edward
Patterson. The prevailing opinion is that
written by Justice mclaughlin, and though
the other Justices agree entirely with his
conclusions, they have taken occasion to
write of the matter, each from bis own
sta ndpoint.
Presiding Justice Morgan j. O'Brien
did not sit on the appeal as he is one Of the
Equitable trustees. The other Justice.
James W. Houghton, was not brought into
the appeal at all.
Justice McLaughlin's opinion is believed
TO carry the most weight among the five
is the one which will be the subject Of
most discussion when the case is carried
to the Court Of Appeals, as it will be very
Don In the course Of his opinion Justice
Mclaughlin. says:
DO the facts set out In the depositions-
the letter Of the defendant upon
which the warrant was issued--eatablish,
facie. that the crime of larceny as now
lefined by the section OF the Penal Code
'eterred t has been committed. and was
here reasonable ground TO believe that tho
committed IL? This Is the real
nd substantial question presented by the
lppeal. Unless it can be answered in the
Affirmative, then the order appealed from
hould be- reversed. the writ sustained and
he relator discharged, because In that event
he Magistrate did not have Jurisdiction to
set,n n warrant IN iigtify N Mn piRt rnta In
a warrant for the arrest of a person
e must first be satisfied from the facts pre-
ented to him. that a crime has been COM
nitted, and then that there IL reasonable
round TO believe the person for whom the
Tarrant is asked committed 1t.
This has been held by numerous authori-
M it has also been held that where
facts are stated wholly upon information
nd belief and the ground OF the belief and
ource OF the Information are not given, that
is insufficient TO confer jurisdiction
pom n Ma ~gistrate to issue a warrant.
IL the facts set out in the dispositions upon
'hieh the warrant here was issued be con-
trued in the most liberal way consistent with
judicial determination. ! am of the opinion
nat such facts do not establish that the
OF grand larceny has been committed.
5 the same is defined by the Penal Code.
First-Such facts certainly do not establish
ITNeuy IL tliutu ny me COlnUlOn law, Inc
efendant had a right to give OF his own
inds TO the chairman of the Republican
ational committee. There was no statute
such contribution and such act
as not. in and of itself, a crime.
The relator made the contribution at the
quest OF the presid ent Of the insurance COM
any, with the express understanding that it
ould repay him. Having made the oontribu-
on, relying upon this understanding, he
len had a claim against the insurance COM
my for the amount advanced. and at is en-
rely immaterial, as far as the question here
'esented Is concerned, whether or not such
could have been enfo reed in a civil
The claim existed. and II, In salts
otlon Of II the defendant received from the
surance company the amount called for
good faith. such reception and thereafter
tention did not constitute larceny.
OF this there can be no doubt. because the
atute provides that upon an indictm ent
r larceny land the sufficiency of the de-
,sitions must he tested in the same way that
g su ficienoy OF an Indictment would bel -
is a al fioient defence that the property
is appropriated openly and avowedly under
ella i'm of title preferred In good faith, even
the claim we're untenable.
The money belonging to the insurance
was appropriated openly and
owcdly' by the ~relator. after all the facts
d been stated TO the finance committee,
reimburse him for the money which he HAD
cN iously advanced. II was not stealthilv
ken, nor was there anything Sccretiye about