New-York tribune., 1907-07-19

strong commission during the insurance inYesti-
cation. He replied that he had not done so, nor
kad he read the newspaper accounts of it at the
time. He added that he felt if he took any ac-
tion while the Armstrong committee was in ses-
sion l. might prove bar TO some Of the evidence
the committee was seeking.
The examination conducted by Mr.. Shearn
then continued follows:
Q.-You got the minutes OF the Armstrong hear
ings when they published? A-Ies-
Q.-Did It come 10 your knowledge that James James
Il. Hyde implicated in that investigation anu
that IL might call for action 10y your once A
1t did
Q.-Do you know that his personal counsel was
Nj Samuel Untermyer? Al knew that MY
Untermyer had appeared for him
Odd il not seem TO you then that 1t was
wrong 10 accept 5000 from Mr. Cntermyer as
contribution 10 your campaign? Alt did not be
cause 1 understood that Mr. De Lancey Nicoll was
Mr. Hyde's counsel in any criminal actions. ana
Mr Unternyer was my warm personal friend.
Q.-Did you consider taking any steps about the
dinner given by Mr.. Hyde to the French Ambas-
sador? Al did
o.-Did you consider any crime had been
rnitted? Al did not consider that crime had
been committed-I did not
Mr. Jerome then declared in reply to ques-
tions that he had gone over the minutes Of the
insurance investigation with great care. Mr..
Shearn next shifted back 10 the matter of con-
tributions and wanted 10 know If any other
single person had sent as large a sum as Mr.
Untermyer's $4,000. Mr.. Jerome told of receiv-
ing $1,000 from Charles W. Morse, "the ice
man." as Mr.. Shearn termed him. TO make his
identity clear The reason I returned It," said
Mr.. Jerome. was because he was connected
with The Hummel- Morse case
The District Attorney said he had not brought
before the grand jury the matter of the Camhon
dinner or Of James Hazen Hydes testimony re-
garding the Equitable syndicate operations. To
the frank question TO whether he asked the
grand jury fo~ an indictment against Mr. Hyde
Mr. Jerome answered: 4 did not" He said he
had not learned Euring the Armstrong invesu-
cation that Thomas 8. Ryan had become cen
nected with the Equitable but thought he had
first heard Of il from the newspapers. When
asked if Lewis L. Delafeld contributed 10 his
campaign he said he did not know. but added
u sincerely hope he did, we were very par
ticular social friends Of long standing.
Referring TO Mr.. Delafield the examination
continued,
Q.-You were aware he was counsel for George
". Perkins, who had testified as TO the $4,000 con-
tributiOn TO the national campaign fund from the
New York Life? A.-Thet all depends on what
theory you consider he was counsel
Q-Arent you aware that Witnesses were exam
ined before the grand jury2 A-Nes. among others
Cornelius Bliss witness. in the sense that
sent him word his office that wanted him. and
he attended.
Mr.. Jerome said certain hypothetical questions
were asked the witnesses, covering the whole
ground OF financial contributions by corpora
tions He continued:
7 saw from the newspapers that considerable eX-
citernent had been aroused 10 syndicate transac
lions i0iur account transactions and pohncai con-
friburions I went very carefully into these mat
ters and came 10 the conclusion that crime had
ro+ heen committed with regard these three
classes Of cases I desired in some way to get a
ruling rom the courts upon these three proposi-
lions
If thev did not constitute crime then my work
would be very much simplifed as I would not
have had 10 submit the grand jury the William
Il. Cranshaw ana other such cases Public opln-
ion had been in1amed by newspaper lawyers by
that do mean lawyers for the newspapers
but lawyers in the editorial rooms. saw that
there was a most eager desire on the part or the
esTscially n connection with the insurance dis
closures
I certainly should not have permitted an indict-
Tneut TO be found Il I did not believe crime had
been committed. If the Appellate Division had
ruled that Indictments should be returned l would
have done all in my power 70 have them found.
Taking up the matter of a letter Mr.. Per-
kins wrote 10 Mr.. Jerome at that time. Mr..
Shearn asked, Mr.. Perkins in that letter put
matters in a light most favorable 10 himself?"
7 don't know about that answered Mr.. Jer-
ONE with smile. The District Attorney con-
tinued, saying that he had put this matter before
Judge O'Sulltvan, who charged the grand jury.
The grand jury informed me-" said the Dis
trict Attorney. that they could not understand
the learned judges remarks and I told them
that 7 could not blame them. as I could not un-
derstand them myself"
PERKINS WILLING TO ASSIST.
Mr.. Jerome vent on 20 testify. in reply to
questions that Mr.. DelafeId, as counsel for Per-
kins called on him and told him that If the
District Attorneys Office wanted books or apers
Of the New York Life Insurance Company or Of
J. p Morgan & Co. every assistance would be
given the prosecutor. Mr.. Jerome said he did
not remember whether Mr.. Delafeld told him he
could examine Mr.. Perkins, but he did not make
an effort 10 question Mr. Perkins"
The District Attorney said he took UP The
court proceedings against Mir. Perkins to get a
ruling, by way Of the habeas corpus. on the
question as 70 whether M Perkins had com
mitted a crime by giving money of the insurance
company 70 the Republican National Committee.
Mr.. Jerome said he had examined the books
Of the New York Life and Of ]. p Morgans
firm. He said he had found the minutes Of
the finance committee Of the New York Life an
entry Of the Perkins TRANSACTIONS but had not
entered this IN his papers Mr.. Jerome said that
before he wrote his letter 10 Perkins asking for
an explanation Of the contribution to the Re
publican campaign fund, he had telephoned to
Mr. Delafeld and told him what he was after
He said he knew Mr. Delafield would apply for
writ Of habeas corpus after Perllins's arrest.
The District Attorney said he procured a war
rant from Magistrate Mott. Then he gave the
following account Of the Perkins affair:
That warrant was handed TO Reardon I told
Reardon 10 90 70 Mr.. DeIafeids office, where Mr..
Perkins would be pointed out to him He did so
and brought Perkins TO the Supreme Court cham
bers. where I met them. A writ was ready an
argument wss heard. and Mr. Perkins was paroled
IN the custody OF his counsel
The case vas taken the Appellate Division.
where It decided against me
Greatly 70 your satisfaction" said Mr..
Shearn.
"No not greatly to my satisfaction" was the
reply of the District Attorney For had al
ways considered that crime had been com
n9itted" ~
Mr.. Shearn asked no more questions on this
line, bat wanted 10 know whether the District
Attorney had investigated the statements that
the insurance companies had expended large
sums for legislative action. He said he had IN
1z9< .l4o