New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1909-02-01
STIMSON WILL HELP
REPLIES TO JEROME ON
CANAL LIBEL CASE.
Action By District attorney Won't
Be Regarded as Interference by
Federal authorities, He Says.

United States Attorney stimson has answered
Che letter from District Attorney Jerome declar-
.,z that proceedings By he latter against The
zz-o-l5" for alleged criminal libel il behalf OF
Dozrlas Robinson would in nowise be regarded
as an interference with tie federal governments
Investigation u the Panama Canal purchase
CHARGES Fs.r would. on the contrary. call for
warm cooperation
Nr. Stirnsor said that each Of the publications
alleged 20 be libellous constitutes separate Of
fence under well known principles Of law He
alluded especially tia circulation Of the news
paper among officers and men OF the army. and
declared that the publication contained charges
OF personal corruption or dishonor against a
gentleman who occupied the position Of head 81
tbe War Department which might well en-
gage the attention Of the officials whose duty
. is 10 enforce the law in those localities
The reference 10 the gentleman who occu-
MED the position Of head OF the War Depart
rnent- gave rise in some quarters TO specula-
tion as 70 the person meant by Mr. Strnson
An Official q the government, who declined TO
permit the use Of his name, said the statement
was Intended &c refer 20 Elihu Root who was
Secretary CT War when negotiations for the
purchase Of the Panama Canal property were
completed. though the deeds Of the property
were actually turned over 70 this country WHEN
William H Taft vas Secretary.
The letter follows:
have received your letter Of January ze and
have given Il careful attention The series o.
r11hlicatiors in The New York world, TO which
ION refer has for some time been under my
consideration. These publications. which con
-ryr with Won in considering libe0us, appear 70
NO fea-3 ,.S-crIated tv the newspaper in Ques-
ZION IN & number Of distinct and INDEPENDENT
jurisdictions. and 10 contain charges rehectlng
57Don the personal character Of a number Of men,
.,f vrhonl some ere in public life and some are
private citizens In each Of these Jurisdictions
under well known principles Of law, each OF
these publications would constitute separate
offence and as IL happens in this case each one
is characterized BY distinct and peculiar 1ea1-
ures.
Your letter makes clear the offence against
the laws Of New York State constituted ny the
attack ur5on the reputation Of MI Robinson CIR
cuiated among his friends and neighbors In New
York County. The circulation OF similar charges
Of personal corruption dishonOr against
gentleman who occupied the position Of head of
the War Department. among the olIlcers anu
men o. the army. resident upon the lnlilIaI i
der+z Of the District Of Columbia Wnere the
Var Department Is situated. may well engage
the attention OF the officials whose duty II is 10
enforce the law IN those localities
But while these alleged offences thus possess
features which are distinct and. TO certain eN-
tent. peculiar 10 tnese olnereIlt Jul
they al relate 10 the same general subject mat
ter-5he Panama Canal purchase-and a prose
cution for any one OF them bears a necessary r
fation to and ray be to some extent pTactlcalIE
affected by the result OF prosecution Tor any
other In such 8 situation 1 conceive that II Is
The DUTY OF ell prosecutors not 20 allow any con-
fict of jurisdiction 10 jeOpardize al ultimate
conviction. but TO take up the work in a spirit
of harmonious cooperation. with the common
aim that the offenders shall be eventually tried
and punished in the forum where that END can
be most suitably and effectively accomplished
IN accordance with your reqnest, 1 nave coll-
fe-red with the Attorney General and ! am
authorized TO say that his views upon the pres
ert situation fully coincide with my own.
In angwer. therefore, to your query as TO
whether z prosecution on your part as 10 the
alleged Libel Of October upon Mr. Robinson
would be regarded an unwise interference
with q matter over which the federal courts
have jurisdiction ard IN which action has al
ready been taken by the federal authorities. l
beg 70 assure you that such action or your part
will In no wise be regarded such an inter
fersnoe. but, on the contrary We shall regard II
rs our duty 10 Cooperate with you in all proper
and lawful ways.
In an OF these several Jurisdictions the truth
Of the alleged libels would in the present case
constitute a complete defence 10 the prosecution
Should such defence be attempted, II Is mani
testify 0f the utmost Importance that this oues-
should be presented 10 the court N the light OF
the fullest possible evidence. and be settled for
I'll tiTae beyond the possibility OF q doubt
You raay therefore Be assured Of my cordial
cooperation IN bringing light all facts relat-
ing this transaction, End I am happy TO ofIer
you access 70 all sources Of information on this
subject under my official control In the same
way should be very glad 10 be furnished by
VOC with any evidence which your invesuga-
TORS upon the subject may disclose.
Mr Robinson who made an affidavit at the re
guest Of Mr.. Jerome. ard upon which the latter
IS expected TO have warrants issued to-day, may
not return 70 this city for week or two He
had long planned q visit to the Southern states.
and had intended TO remain away three weeks
His presence is not necessary 70 the immediate
beginning OF an action by Mr.. Jerome for an in
oictrneut but. as the complainant MI Robinson
VIII heve to be here when the proceedings begin
sn court