New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-06-16
PICK RE|CHMANN Jury
Former Head Of Carnegie Trust
Faces Trial To-Day.
ROBIN MAY BE A WITNESS
Contention That Defendant S
Rights Had Been Violated
Again Denied.

The jury which will try Joseph 3. Reich
mann. former president OF the Carnegie
Trust Company, on an Indictment charging
him with making n false report OF the
company's condition on September 3, 1910.
tn the State Banking Department. was
selected yesterday in the Criminal Branch
Of the Supreme Court
John Kirkland Clark. the Assistant Dis
trict Attorney. who conducted the investi-
cation Of the trust company's affairs after
the concern was closed by the Banking De-
partmert and who presented 10 the grand
Jury evidence that resulted in the indict-
ment Il Reichmann. William j Cummins
end former City Chamberlain Charles n.
Hyde will make the opening address this
morning for the prosecution. outlining the
POINTS IT expects TO prove and on which the
conviction Of Reichmann will be asked.
Excepting that It was accomplished in
quicker time than expected. the selection OF
the jury was devoid Of special interest
District Attorney Whitman personally eX-
amned the talesmen $50 OF whom In
special panel had been summoned for the
trial while the interests OF the defendant
were looked after by Stephen c. Baldwin
and John r. Stanchheld.
Assisting the District Attorney. besides
Mr. clark. We're Assistant District Attorney
Delehanty and William NJ. WINS. the latter
retained especially for the trial Of Reich
mann.
The members OF the jury are as follows:
j. Edward Keveney. 40. 1873 East SOth
street. wholesale fruit dealer foreman;
Nathan Lemlen. No. i23 East 4th street.
real estate William H. O. Van Duser. No.
7ls CauldweH avenue. bookkeeper; Harry
Philips. No 562 West 18th street. clothier;
Edward Hagaman Hall. 80. 50 Manhattan
avenue, secretary: William G. Harrison
No I'll West Hist street, agent. l.. Comp
ton Miller, 40. 622 West 18th street, man
aCer: George II. Budlong. No III Wads-
worth avenue, architect; Harris |. Harlan
No 56l West 18th street. saloon Francis I.
McKenna. No 6l9 West li3d street, man
ager. Albert $. Gottlieb. No. 149 East &th
street. architect. and Thaddeus 5. Barlow
No sol West l7lst street. assistant super
II tendent
Before the jury was completed ffty-one
talesmen had been examined. OF this num-
her twentv-seven were excused by consent
% both sides. and one by Justice Davis,
who presided. Seven others were per-
emptoriiy challenged three by the prose-
cution and four by the defence. The re-
naming four were disposed Of by chal-
lenges for cause three by the prosecution
and one BY the defence.
In questioning talesmen Mr. Baldwin
said the charge against Reichmann was
that he had signed a report 70 the state
Banking Department that he was required
nv law 10 make, a report that was false
and known by him 70 be false when he
signed II and was false in material par
tlculars.'
The name Of Joseph . Robin. the for
mer banker. who pleaded guilty 10 in
dictments against him charging grand
larceny in connection with the failure Of
the Washington Savings Bank and the
Northern Bank. was used by both sides.
Mr. Whitman questioned few talesmen
as 70 any acquaintance or relation they
might have with the various persons and
corporations whose names have appeared
frequently in connection with the reports
Of the Carnegie Trust Company grand Jury
nvestiga ton.
Mr. Baldwin asked whether or not the
talesmen knew or had heard Of Robin. who
viii. II is expected. be one Of the principal
witnesses for the prosecution. Mr.. Whit
man thereupor inquired whether or not the
fact that Robin had pleaded guilty 70
grand larceny would prejudice the tales
men against the defendant The answer
was Invariably in the negative.
When Mr. Baldwin prAfaced a question
b. stating that ReicImann was not presi-
dent Of the trust company ar the time II
closed its doors. but that "a man expert
enced in banking affairs was az its head.
evidently meaning william J. Cumrrs
objection by the District Attorney was
sustained
Before the examination Of the talesuen
counsel for the defence made objection TO
empanellins jury on the ground that the
defendants constitutional rights had been
violated. The argument advanced by Mr..
Baldwin was the same as made nv him on
the motion 10 dismiss the indictment. which
v as denied ~ Justice Davis. The second
motion was also denied and the selection
Of jury proceeded
The offence for which Reichmann is in
dicted Is a n1isdemeanor. the maximum
penalty being one year IN prison and 800
fine.