Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1909-03-25
Gov. Hughes Has Dismissed the
Charged Of Misconduct and
Neglect against Him.
CHARGES NOT SUSTAINED
No Evidence Presented 70 Justify the
Impeachment Of the District At
torney-CharEes Were Made
by VI. r. King and other
Metropolitan Men.

Albany. n. Y. March 23.--Sustaining
the findings OF Richard l. Hand Of
Elizabethtown whom he appointed
commissioner to take testimony and
report on the charges Of alleged mis-
conduct and neglect OF duty preferred
against District Attorney William r.
Jerome Of New York, o Hughes
tonight made public his decision, in
which he d,smisses the charges. Mr..
Hand reported that the charges were
not sustained and exonerated Mr.. Je-
rome.
A petition for the removal of Mr..
Jerome from office was filed with Gov.
Hughes several months z by WILL
liam p. King and others representing
a committee Of stockholders Of the
Metropolitan Street Railway company
and was based upon 70 charges. OF
these nine were held by the Governor
as not being within his jurisdiction
and were not considered. supple
mental charges were later filed and
were considered.
The charges related among other
things to certain specified matters dis.
closed during tho legislative insurance
Investigation and matters connected with
the affairs Of New York city traction
companies.
In Diminishing the charges the Cover
nor gave out a long memorandum IN
which he concludes:
II have carefully examined the volum-
nous record. and I have studied the
evidence which Il contains with regard
to the Investigations and proceedings
OF the district attorney in the various
matters to which the charges relate.
and I agree with the commissioners in
not been sustained. Nothing has been
presented which furnishes any just
ground for impeaching the good faith
CT the district attorney In connection
with any OF the transactions set forth.
nor he's anything been shown which
would justify his remova from ONCE.
Il therefore dismiss the charges"
Discussing tho charges generally the
Governor says:
THE fundamental principles govern
ing proceedings OF this sort, though fire.
ouentry overlooked In public discussion,
are entirely clear.
"A district attorney Is not an ap.
pointive oficer removable at the discretion
Of the appointing power. He IS an
elective officer. elected By the people
within his county Ind 10 not arnendable
TO the Governor. except in the manner
prescribed by the constitution.
The law providing for administration
by the Officers vhom h people have
elected in their respective localities must
be faithfully executed a. veil ~ any
other law.
"2--Ths constitution provides that the
Governor may remove . district attorney,
giving TO such oficsr . copy Of the
charges against him and an opportunity
TO DO hearo In his defence.
The Governors exercise OF this i'm.
portart power Is not subject 70 review
but this does not mean thai he may act
arbitrarily. The Governor has no light
to remove except upon charges made
and sustained. whether or not charges
have been sustained must be determined
by an impartial consideration OF the evil
dence, and prejudice or prepossession
should ave no place.
gin considering charges against a
district attorney. the question is not
simply whether crimes have been com.
mitted or indictments have been found
or convictions have been obtained but
whether the district attorney has been
guilty OF such misconduct or neglect or
duty ms to require or justify his removal
from office.
"a public officer IA entitled TO the
same p~resunptions In his favor as those
which in accordance with the spirit Of
our institutions are raised in favor OF
any other persons accused Of wrenx
doing.
"The fact that he is a public officer
docs not deprive him Of the right 10 be
considered innocent by fair-minded pep.
pie until he Il proved guilty, and to be
free from thu imputation Of bad faith
or improper motive until tho evidence OF
II Is clearly shown"