The morning journal-courier., 1908-05-27

for him to procure facts showing
criminal intent"
Continuing Mr.. Pierce quoted the
testimony Of Tilllnghast, who served
as a juror In many cases and who
was carried over one term TO another
on many occasions, and says. He tells
us he received money for every case
In which he sat as a juror for the |
metropolitan and describes wildly the |
manner IN which It was received.
But these are not the most ser- |
GUS matters, About every officer in
the city court was manipulating |
jurymen In the interest of the Met
ropolltan and Of attorneys for pri-
vate parties who could pay them
small sums of money" BY means OF
vouchers, printed from the originals
which still exist, Mr. Pierce endeav-
ors to show how the attorneys man
aged 0 conrol he clerks Of the court
when these facts were disclosed
to the district attorney" SAYS Mr.
Pierce, III he possessed any of the
true spirit of public prosecutor, he
would have gone after the law break
err lie did nothing of the kind" To
show that Mr.. Jerome knew of these
corrupt conditions the brief gives the
story Of the attempts Of Mr., Julian,
who was an employee OF the Metro
polan for ten years and instrumental
In the alleged briberles OF juries, to
furnish the Office Of the district attor-
ney with the necessary evidence Mr..
Smyth Is the only assistant in the dis
trict attorneys Office who pretends to
have investigated this matter. He
had the evidence OF both Tillinghast
and Bagg, and he could have at once
proceeded before the December. 1906,
grand jury, and hundred corrobo-
rating circumstances might have been
added And yet this young man
Smyth tells us he had come to the
conclusion that II was impossible for
him to secure sufficient evidence Of
the commission Of one Of these
crimes.
Every thoughtful man knows that
such cnnditionse are a hundred times
more dangerous to he welfare Of So
ciety than murder itself, but in spite
VI Alllst Nj i ltls 70 utfldItu MT.
Jerome regarded such a condition of
affairs as scarcely Of any serious i'm
portance, Il may be wrong In my
estimate" he continued but | submit
TO your honors that a more serious
and more dangerous conditions nf af-
fairs has never been developed than
the evidence here shows, Yet Mr.
Jeroms treats such an opinion as
mere hifalutin."
The circumstances attending
hearing before Justice Seahury IN the
supreme court in which Mr.. Jerome
withdrew after an argument with the
justice, MIR. Pierce declared to show
as discreditable an act as ever done
by a public official Then taking
up the testimony Of the present hear
ing regarding certain uncomplmen-
tary remarks which the district attor-
ney Is alleged to have made with ref
erenco to Justice Seabury the brief
continued:
Yet this district attorney, who has
been recreant to every official ohl-
cation, 10 every trust confded In him,
who went before Judge Seabury on
| his investigation claiming that he
wanted to help him, and then used
every effort TO ohstruct Judge Sea-
burys investigation. ends up by in
sultng the judge and leaving the
hearing in auger. still persists in Will
iication Of this honorable Judge, upon
whom he heaps every epithet which
I ~ fnsN gNt Al al 49, la.
ity could not visit 'he people of New
York than the continuation Of the
evil example and the disgraceful con
duet of William Trayers Jerome IN the
office of public prosecutor of New
York county"
Taking up the case OF George W. Per-
kins in the so-called political contribu.
tion case the brief says:
II is undisputed that Mr.. Jerome
would not furnish any evidence to the
March grand jury, and we have his
own statement that II they had found
an indictment against George w. Per
kns that he would have refused to
sign t.
such conduct on the part Of the dis
triet attorney and his position that he
would not sign an indictment of the
grand jury, Is In and Of itself mlscon.
duct-sross misconduct and It affords
ample reason for his removal
For the purpose OF shielding Mr.
Perkins from criminal prosecution he
Instituted a proceeding before Justice
Joseph l.. Moss, city magistrate. In
that proceeding instead Of invoking the
admissions Of Mr. Perkins before the
Armstrong committee to the fact that
the matter Of these campaign disburse-
ments did not come before the finance
committee and was wholly the work
of Perkins and President Mccall, he
prepared evidence directly to the con-
trary, and placed before the magls-
the affidavit OF Mr. +. u. Randolph,
contradictlng his statement before the
Armstrong committee, and finally as n
elimination Of this misconduct per-
nitted letter from Mr. Perkins, de-
claring his innocent intent in the trans
action. TO be used as the basis of the
whole proceeding.
Tho criminal proceeding before
Judge Moss was, so far as the district
attorney and the defendants attorney
were concerned, oollusive, and there is
no doubt about It. At least such a case
would have been colusive, but for the
official relation in which Mr.. Jerome
acted.
THE fact that It appeared from the
afldavits laid by Mr.. Jerome before
Justice Moss that this money dnvolv-
ed in the Perkins case) was devoted,
with the knowledge and consent Of the
| finance committee Of this corporation,
to the purposes of aiding the campaign
of Mr. Roosevelt and the declaration
/ of Mr.. Perkins letter as to his inno-