New-York tribune., 1909-10-14

Mr.. ELDER ON THE GAYNOR CHARGES
Assistant District Attorney Elders statement
adds seriousness to the accusations made by Mr..
WINS against Justice GaynOr. Mr.. Elder was
the prosecutor in charge of the gambling cases.
and his information convinced him that JUS
tice GaynOr had signiied his friendliness to the
gambling interests and that they relied upon
the Judge for an opinion that would practically
nullify the HaTt-Agnew law. They tried TO
arrange for a test case and it was and is MI.
Elders belief that they intended to bring such
a case if he had consented 10 II, before Justice
Gaynor Mr. Elder further says that when
they finally did succeed in arranging for a test
case he warned the counsel for the gamblers
that If it were brought before Justice GaynOr
he would take steps 10 prevent the judge from
acting in it. 1t was not taken before Justice
Gaynor but before another judge, who ren-
dered an opinion unsatisfactory TO the gamblers.
Another test case was then prepared involving
bet not on horse races but on a golf match.
This was brought in another county, where Mr.
Elder could not interpOse objections 10 Justice
Gaynor's sitting. and Justice GaynOr did hear
the case. As evidence of the judges activity
and interest in the case Mr.. Elder cites the
declaration of the District Attorney of Nassau
County. where ii was held, that the judge di-
rected him to take part in it, although he was
averse To doing so. In that case Justice Gay
nor rendered an opinion that suited the pur-
poses of the gamblers.
More briefly, Mr.. Elders story amounts to
this Information was current at the time OF
the passage of the anti-gambling laws that JUS
tice GaynOr was hostile to them, that he had
caused or at least permitted, his hostility to
be known TO the gambling interests, and that he
was ready to sit in a test case and render an
opinion favorable to the gamblers. Mr.. Elders
tl,y 20 yoal-o al fpst WAS
brought before Justice Gaynor prevented the
plans being carried out in Brooklyn. But the
reports of Justice GaynOrs attitude toward the
law and desire to serve the gambling interests
appear to have been corrObOrated when what
looks like a trumped-up gambling case was
brought in another county and Justice Gaynor
interested himself in it, heard it and rendered
precisely the opinion that the racetrack gam
blers wanted.
This falls far short of corroborating Mr..
Ivins's charges for it says nothing regarding
the alleged meeting between Justice Gaynor
and representatives of the gamblers; but COM
ing from responsible public official who is a
member of the same political party as Justice
GaynOr it adds TO the gravity of the accusation
against him. He must do something more than
make a general denial of these charges now.
If he allowed a prospective litigant to know
his opinion concerning a law and then sat In
a case brought by that litigant under that law
be did a mOnstrously indecent and unjudicial
thing. If he. a judge on the bench, actually
cOnspired with the gamblers to defeat the anti
gambling laws he is unfit for the sufrages OF
the people. We are loath to believe the charges,
and we still lack evidence upon which to deter
mine whether they or are not true. But,
coming as they do from a public prosecutor,
they must be disproYed. If Justice Gaynor does
not meet them promptly and fully the people
will believe them.