New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-08-04
PUTS BLAME ON JEROME
Witness Says He Refused to
Prosecute Poultry Trust.
WISE LETTER GAVE WARNING
United States District Attorney
Declared Law Was Violated
Nineteen Being Tried.

The statement that w. T. jerome. when
District Attorney. had refused TO prosecute
the so-called Live Poultry Trust was nnaue
by a witness in General Sessions yes'e'
day. at the trial of nineteen memoeis vi
the New York Live Poultry COMMISSION
Merchants Protective Association. the al
legged trust. on a charge Of conspiracy 10
maintain a monopoly Mr.. Jerome Is coun-
sci for the defendants. II was intmated
by Assistant District Attorney DE foru'
who is conducting the prosecution, that MT.
Jerome may have an opportunity before
the trial ends to GO on the witness s'a''
and make any explanation he wishes
Under cross-examination by Mr. DE or"'
Erving V. Dryer, one Of the defendants
was asked in substance:
Didn't committee Of live poultry ued'
ers wait upon Mr.. Jerome when he was
District Attorney and make comp'a''''
against your association, and was not ','a'
committee Informed that the ASSOCIATION
was violating the law
II understood that Mr.. Jerome stated tna'
the association was not violating the Ia"
and could not be prosecuted rePlieu
Dryer.
''Didn't that committee or delegation see
Assistant District Attorney Nott' anu
didn't Mr.. Mott inform them that the iao'S
presented constituted violation OF tne
law, and that he was prepared To MAKE an
investigation II names and additional data
were forthcoming
81 don't know" was the witnesses reply,
repeated when Mr. DE Ford asked II such
n Committee had not also called upon
United States District Attorney Wise, VINO
likewise Informed it that the association
was violating the law.
II is a fact that the District Attorney
office has a letter written by Mr.. Wise, In
which he states that he did so inform
delegation of live poultry dealers that hau
called TO complain about methods OF the
commission merchants protective orsanl-
zation.
Assistant District Attorney Mott. VINO was
continued in Office by District Attorney
Whitman when he succeeded Mr. Jerome,
stated last night that In 1908 or 1919 sever al
live poultry dealers complained to him that
the association in question was DRIVING
Them out of business by methods which ne
decided were contrary 10 law.
He so Informed his callers. he said ana
told them that he was prepared TO lhFesu-
gate the matter and prosecute tire onehuels
n the complainants would supply certain
additional evidence which he required.
"When 7 informed the members of the
committee that | intended. once ] began
10 go ahead with the prosecution even IL
they afterward joined the association said
MIR Mott. they looked at one another ana
erinned. Then they left, and l never heard
from them again"
Mr.. Dwyer also stated yesterday on the
witness stand that he had shipped poultry
from the West to himself At New York.
acting simultaneously as. shipper and re-
cever.
Did you pay "A commission 10 yourseh
as receiver" asked Mr.. De tord.
Il did" replied Dryer.
And then put per cent into the joo-
bers' and receivers pool?
II did" was the answer.
Mr.. Jerome caused surprise when Dryer
had left the stand by calling as witness
Assistant District Attorney Morris b. MOS
lowitz who has been associated with MI
De Ford in the prosecution Of the case.
In repIy 10 a question Mr.. MoskoWitz
stated that. with an expert accountant, ne
had examined the books Of J. \. MOTIFS,
Son & CO.. of which J. y. Norris one OF
the defendants, is a member. Mr.. jerome
go, no further in his examination.
"I won't stand for this shouted Mr. DE
Ford at Is the sharpest practice nave
ever seen, TO take a man who mas beeh
so closely associated with me III TINS case
and place him on tho stand
Mr. Jerome interrupted 10 protest at the
rofcrence 70 sharp practice, and Judge
posaIskv admonished the jury To- disregard
,ho ro,,ark Mr. Jerome did not, however.
nersist I'm his examination of Mr.. MOS
kntAiiZ