The Caucasian., 1907-02-28
Subscription Price s2.oo a year.
WAS NOT LARCENY.


An extraordinary decision has been
4 rendered by majority of the Court Of
Appeals of New York. Of the seven
Judges, four have reached the conclusion
{ that Geo. w. Perkins is not guilty Of
larceny, while three of the Judges dis
= sented.
George w. Perkins was vice president
Of the New York Life Insurance Com
pany, who gave away thousands of dol
lars of money to the Republican cam
paign committee from the funds of the
company According TO the decision of
the four ridges, Perkins did not com
NIT larceny as he had no criminal it1-
tent when he appropriated these thous
sands. of dollars from the trust funds as
contributions to defeat the candidate of
the Democratic party.
Ii is a fact notorious that millions Of
money were secured to defeat Bryan.
and Judge Parker of New York suffered
defeat through the same agency 1t was
these contributions of millions which as
stirred the election Of Roosevelt, notwith-
standing his radical denunciation and his
shallenge to Parker for proofs, which
atl that time could not be produced. but
developed later on investigations which
involved Perkins and other heads of in
ssirance companies OF New York.
The decision of four of the Judges of
! she court of New York will have ten
aeBcy TO encourage rascality in high
places. The plain construction of this
decision il that an individual, entrusted
with millions, may apply these millions
as he may elect, and he can not be held
anenable for larceny if at the time he
gave away these millions he was not ac-
fnated by criminal intent Is it not fair
to infer that it is only the common herd
OF society who commit or can be held
tor larceny, and that the high-toned, the
high roller, the man away up in the
scale, who handles hundreds of tfous-
ands and millions Of money may scoop
the whole pot, If at the time of his talk
ing or his giving away this money en-
trissted TO his keeping, there was no
criininal intent on his part to commit
larceny.
Let it be noted that, according to this
decision, men in high places are not toi
le riasscd with atlfes petty thief who sell
dom escapes the pen for larceny. How
would Perkins have Jared II he were not
of the select. the favored and the ex-
esptcd. whose ample cloak bearing the
insignia OF the dollar covers all short
suniings and exeinpts from the crime of
larceny? i.
Fortunately, the minority of the Court
Of Appeals of New York have dissented,
declaring that larceny consists in the
taking Of the property of others, which,
y responsive 10 the good old coinmon
law, which recognizes all individuals asi
being ,akke when called to the bar off
iustice to stand trial for larceny. 1t ISL
common sense to assume that the appro-
prlation Of the money or the property Of
another, without his consent, is GRIM
nal, which may be condoned, as in this
case, prompted doubtless by the desire
g relieve sthe Republican campaign COM
naastee of the stigma, which can not be
evaded or removed.
Al any rate. viewed in whatever phase
lhis extraordinary decision may be pre-
sented, its effect Is deplorabIe, as ii will !
snrouraee peculation and speculation
sith trust funds and other funds by men !
y high places who can have little fear, n
. IN New York, where the taking of the
property OF others is not larceny, unless
t be proven that the individual who may
appropriate or steal the money had mol !,
1tent to commit larceny. Ir