New-York tribune., 1906-12-11
PERKINS CASE HEARD.
IN COURT OF APPEALS.
Nesc York Life Campaign Comtribu-
t;on Attachced and Defended.

vvas argued before the Court of Appeals to-day
Grand larceny IN the first degree is the charge
made by District Attorney Jerome against MT
Perkins II was shown before the Armstrong In"
surance Committee year ago that Mr.. Perkins
Maid the money out of his own funds and was
afterward reimbursed with interest out of those
of the New York Life Insurance Company.
The original proceeding was an application by
the District Attorney to Magistrate Moss on
March 2S for a bench warrant for the arrest of
Mr. Perkins The warrant was issued he was
arrested and his counsel obtained a writ OF
habeas corpus. which was dismissed by Justice
Greenbaum OF the Supreme Court, who thus up
held the contention of the District Attorney that
a crime had been committed. Mr.. Perkins ap>
pealed to the Appellate Division, which reversed
Justice Grenbaum and ordered the release of
the defendant. 1t is from this decision Of the
Appellate Division that the District Attorney
appealed the argued to-day.
ARGUMENT OF PROSECUTION.
Wallace MacFarlane, of New York, made the
argument for the people.
I'VE shall contend" he said, that Perkins was
what would generally be called accessory be-
fore the fact TO what would generally be called
an eTnbezzlement Of the funds OF the New York
Life Insurance Company. The Penal Code calls
an accessory before the fact principal. and
calls embezzlement larceny"
Mr. MacFarIane quoted from the afidavits
| which formed the basis for issuing the warrant
for Mfr, Perkinss arrest. These afhdavits told
of the meeting of the finance committee of the
New York Life Insurance Company in Decem-
Der, 1904. at which the subject of reimbursing
Mr.. Perkins for his contribution to the Repubr-
can National Committee in September of that
year came up for consideration. Mr.. MacFarlane
said that after that meeting check for s4s,702 so
dvax 70 ffa nS 7 y E. 70
| to reimburse George W. Perkins"
at appears in Perkins's letter." said Mr. Mac
Farlane. that Perkins a member Of the
| firm OF ]. p. Morgan & Co. and that the sum
was credited to his account upon the books Of
that firm. The book entries of this transaction
were made rs to conceal its nature"
Continuing. Mr.. MacFarlane said:
The question involved in his case whether cor
without consideration moving TO 1T, and without
foreign to it's business Gf not also against public
| policy) and known or feared by him to be wrong,
not been speccay covered By any proVsion Of
the penal code. nevertheless commits the crime of
Assuming Perkins to have stood In the shoes of
the Republican National Committee. that commit
tee gave the company no property % no obligation c
account and It IS matter so familiar as TO be
inittees never did account until the election in this
state the present year 1t Is also matter OF judi
such purposes that any conceivable contract which
It might have made with the company IN considera-
lion Of this money would have been Illegal and
Obviously. the business of the New York Life
Insurance Company was Insurance Certai1iy Certainly
corporate business than to engage in political cam
paigns and expend the funds winch It held foI inc
tion 10 political office Of the candidates favored by
the form the transaction takes at the time Of the
payment Is the rembursement Of Perkins for rad ad-
! dent OF the company, It may be assumed that the
the payment was. Of course, not made to discharge
any actual obligation of the New York Late In
original scheme Of Mccall and Perkins k to give
sgcr favorite % 5I canddates FOR once which Perkins
| had advanced with the intention or taxing the
money from the corporate treasury at later date
THE PAYMENT UPHELD.
Ex-Justice William n. Cohen. assisted by
Lewis L. Dea1eld, appeared in behalf of Mr.
Perkins Mr.. Cohen declared that the essential
| elements OF embezzlement were lacking and that
| the records of the case disclosed nothing from
| which it could be inferred that any act was ami
! mated by anything but a rightful intent. He
urged that a subscription which corporation
might have made to the San Francisco relief
| fund or which bank might make to a church.
might be classed something outside of the
| business Of the corporation. and therefore.
contribution which the stockholders in the cor
poration might recover from the officers making
| u
allow any basis for a criminal action against
these officers.
Touching the subject of the contribution.
| Judge Cohen said:
| A campaign subscription is per SO a moral act.
and in the absence OF affirmative evidence that
particular subscription is animated by an immoral
| purpose, there can be no presumption based upon
the character Of the act which will lead to the in
ference il is not within the implied powers OF
| the company.
Judge Cohen argued that in no could 1t
be held that the book entries of the company
| showed any intent to conceal the action, for be-
| fore the entries were made the true facts of the
| case were laid before those who could by any
| possibility inspect the books. Continuing. he
| said
ceiving this reimbursement. the reator did and
! the contain and was dealing with the company
| as completely and at arms length as would any
an insured presenng claim upon { RoGy g
have Lead ths otficers Of the New York Life In
surance Company TO believe that the interests Of
| the Republican rather than of the Democratic
| ticket in the last national campaign.
| 1t is manifest that the subscription in question
| was as much to the interest OF the company, and
| vestment in the nature of insurance against pos
| sble probable calamity and that directors OF
ceny of its funds for effective fire insurance upon
| its property in excess Of what some one else might
In the case at bar there is evidence to lead
to conclusion that the sum subscribed dis
proportionate the interests of the corporation in
the results Of the campaign. There is not the
faintest glimmer OF a suggestion that any selfish
corrupt purpose underlay it. Clearly therefore, it
OF the corporation and the writ of habeas corpus
was properly sustained by reason of the absence Of
| any proof of misappropriation.
MINISTER'S AGREE WITH PRESIDENT.
| [By Telegraph 90 The Tribune