New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1910-02-24
LITTLETON OPENS
DEFENCE OF ALLDS
S.fI.S .SEN.4TOR .fCTED
II PLfTT'S BEHEST.
"Ei1dcr Com paaieS Sought
Ticfims an II hom 10
Press Brides.
lBy Telegraph 80 The Tribune

TffI0rPE
afor Repn Conger as their representative
rs rhe most unSpeakable band Of thieves
and organized corruptioniSts that ever
nefouIed 2 commonwealth, Martin W
LirtIeton o-day opened the defence "t
Senator Jotl1am T. Aids. accused of haV-
ing demanded and received a $1,000
hrihe. Seemingly the defence is 10 fol
low tpo lines:
First-That the bridge companies were
not blscknaiied snc held up but were
seeking victims on whom to press their
bribes
Second-That GOTHAM P. Aids. the in,-
pacable foe Of these corruptonists on
every occasion, save when he helped
them Kill their bill in 1901. was acting
;hen at the direct behest of Senator
Thomas c. PIstt.
The Aids case had distinct pcliticai
t1nee TO-DAY, aside from this seeking of
shelter behind the back of the former
leader Of the Republican party. Before
teginning the defence. MI. Littleton
read formal statement in which he
announced the resignation of Senator
Aids as temporary president, on the
ground that ne did not care ''as the
elected leader Of the Republican major
ify in the Senate 10 embarra IS his fel-
low Republicans by calling on them to
rass judgment on his guilt or inno-
oence.7 The report Of the charges
against Senator Aids was first carried
- him on January =. It was first
printed January 1S-more than a month
before the date of this resignation
Littleton held that an examination Of
the constitution revealed that there was
2 question whether the present proceed
iues could be effective. in view OF the
fact that the office Of temporary presi-
dent is q constitutional one. and that
Aids s removal should he brought about
through impeachment proceedings
THOUGHT DEFGNCE PECULIAR
The defence seemed somewhat peculiar
- many lay.nen here, because it con
sisted more in denunciation Of the bridge
interests and Senator Conser than in
discussion cf the impossibility OF guilt
nn the part Of Senator Aids. Mr.. Lii
flAton built an elaborate structuro To
snow that the bridge corruptionists
frs1T = SITTER ellrlify- TO Senator Aids, and |
- a diTect motive 70 attack him.
One part Of his case. and an impor-
tant part consisted in the reading Of a
Cleveland agreement between various
bridge companies. which in effect was a
cortract Tor Ccllusive bidding on public
~-ork with pro rata division Of the al
'reAd Illegal profits among the parties
. hat agreement This. however, was
entered into in 1895 while the alleged
lribe taking took place in 1901.
The first witness summoned by the
defence had a somewhat unplea SAINT
eKpe-ierce AT the hands of James N.
osborne. chief counsel for Senator Con-
eer ar counsel tn the people" as he |
PERSISTS in calling himself This was /
Hiram r. Porter. clerk cf the Assembly /
Internal Affairs Committee in 1901, who /
Tes called b!- the Aids side TO show /
hat Senator ConSer improperly and ir- /
-egularlv manipulated the highway I
legislation in the absence Of aIr. Stevens. !
'ts introdUcer. Much stress was laid +
by -lfe Aids lawyers on an entry show /
ing that q vote WAS taken to hold these |
Isis IN committee Mt Littleton said /
il v-ss his belief that the history Of par
l5anlenrary procedure never before I
showed such an occurrence.
WORKED FOR ALLDS SIDE.
T-nder cross examination by Mr. Os-
borne Porter was forced to admit that
n himself recorded that vote at d regu-
iar meeting Of the committee. that it was
1rGo I, the best of his knowleds
whether ar not such procedure WAS un-
.j,recedented. and that no member Of the
committee ever had complained of being
r.isreTsresented hy the record. Also in
MS cross examination he was forced TO
admit that he had told a falsehood de
lihcratel1 TO Senator Conger at one stage
II the legislative proceedings Recently.
also. he worked for the Aids side OF the
sasc 70 the extent Of serving 4 subpoena !
nn = witness at Ciroton.
% al in al, this first day Of the Dc
fence did not shed over the Aids side
any roseate hue. A anaIyzed by Law
ers here. il was an attempt 10 dlscredit
'he general character and business his
tors of the bridge interests and the men
ronnacted will them. 10y showing that
bribery aad illegal combinations were
every -day affairs with them. coupled
18th this Was tIi,. statement that Aids
o. iTf'- IeH WHAT every senator VIII
5'""gnize a. an ample reason Tor his
@nauc; "a reference t. the Piatt in
''"Hnce or. as it was phrssed i,luntly
'v -"ise lawyer. Aids Was presented hy
lssz 'rounsel - killing What a., ronsid-
'red good hil st the orders Of his
larty boss. though he knew the men |
" h3 Nantsd a. killed yere professional
oorruptionists.
NJ t-ittIeton did not I3ot it il! ,ha;
precise fasi'ie,.. bgt hjs stater,1ent of il
ras little more complimentary to his
.lient A6Grass'hc the senate. after tel
: 81 Aids hostii:ty to lie bridge in
ia},es,s he sa;a.
.ul viii have 40 dete,Tnine whether
i.- hes rev zerseG himself ia d snomontary
sud iusieaiIcaaf corruption. or whether
~ did s,l .tct of assisting in holding it
this afl. 81 committee becaus he had
i.oea asked t. do ." bt his party
ieadere
APPEAL TO THE SENATE
Hr Litfie;on began his defence this
u.ornin- iv an appeal to the senate
-.1r.rnittee IF the Whole 10 suspend
35einent oa his client units the Aids
l.f,...- diSrfnFfft I