Waterbury evening Democrat., 1907-10-11

iSts to Teli on the Stand nat Whit-
 ney Got It"-Statute of Limitations Hasn't OutIawed Deals.
 New York, Oct 11.-Unless District Attorney Jerome puts the grand jury to work on the Metropolitan railway scandal and the Whitney -Ryan-Dolan- Elkins- -Widener deal revealed by An thony N. Brady, it is said, the public service commission will make repre- sentations to Governor Hughes in Al bany which may lead to the appoint ment of special attorney general to do what Jerome may manifest an un- willingness to do No official state ment to that effect has been issued by the public service commission or any of it's members There were circum- stantial rumOrs, however, that the commission had decided to send to the governor a transcript of the testimony unless Jerome seemed disposed to take action. The commissioners, if they act, will not recommend the appoint ment of a special attorney general. They will simply call the attention of Governor Hughes to conditions and let him decide what shall be done.
 Challenge to Financers.
 William NJ. Twins, chief prOber for the commission, issued challenge to P. A. B. Widener and Thomas Dolan of Philadelphia. They are two of the men who received Brady checks in connection with the Wall and Cort- land Street Ferries railway franchise deal put through by Whitney.
 ''Messrs Dolan and Widener have written statements explaining that the money received by them was in pay ment of an indebtedness of MT. Whit ney," MT. Wins said. That is inter esting, but not nearly so interesting as the testimony of those gentlemen would be if they would only come here go on the witness stand and al low me to examine them in regard to the Metropolitan Street Railway con- pany and the Metropolitan Traction company between the years 1892 and 1902"
 Can't Force Them to Testify.
 Whether Dolan and Widener will come to testify is not known here. Neither Twins nor the commission will ask them to come. Their appearance must be voluntary. It was between 1892 and 1902 that many profitable deals were pulled off by men interested in traction properties. Most of the books and vouchers covering that pe- riod have disappeared.
 That the statute of limitations would protect Thomas F. Ryan, Thomas Do- Ian and P. A, B. Widener if it should be disclosed the transaction conducted through Brady was of a criminal na- ture was denied. It was said the stat ute of limitations did not run against Dolan and Widener, who are nonresi- dents, and that the time which Thom- as F. Ryan spent abroad and in Nir' ginia would count off the five years limitation. It also was asserted 1t was not for District Attorney Jerome to decide what absences from the state should count as against the five years. Neither did that duty devolve upon the court. Primarily, it was said, it devolved on the grand jury. and sec ondarily upon a trial jury, If one should be drawn. That was establish ed positively, it was said, by the su- preme court of Missouri in the case against Snyder, one of the men prose cuted by Folk.
 The Law Governing Case.
 In that case the statute of limitations was invoked for the benefit of the de- fendant The question arose whether the absences of the defendant from the state were to be deducted from the term of limitations. The court held it was for the jury to determine whether Snyder was a resident or a nonresident and if resident what de ductiOns should be made.
 Section 1I3 of the code of criminal procedure of this state reads: No time during which the defendant is not an inhabitant or usually resident within the state or usually in personal attend ance upon business or employment within the state is part of the limita-