New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1912-03-29
Judge Rejects First Presentment
Clearing the Prisoner OF
Charge on Which He
Was Convicted.
GRAIN ENJOINS SECRECY
Regrets Publicity Regarding Pro.
ceedings in Long Investiga.
ton, but Blames No One
Mortimer L. Schiff's
Statement.

statement.
The grand fury investigating the
Brandt case brought in a report yester-
day afternoon. finding no evidences OF
conspiracy, and was discharged by Judge
Grain. So ended the case that has oc-
cupied tho time Of the grand jury for
nearly two months and has entailed the
hearing Of forty-one witnesses, including
Folke f. Brandt, Mortimer l.. Schiff and
Mrs. Schiff, and the examination or
great mass Of documentary evidence.
Howard S. Cans was the only person Of
any Importance mentioned in the case
who was not a witness before the grand
jury.
The probability of another grand jury
being called upon TO consider the case re-
mains open. District Attorney Whitman
said yesterday afternoon, however. that
he had nothing TO say on this question.
and the grand jury Just discharged
called Mortimer L. Schiff as a witness
after Judge Grain had given his opinion
that Schiff and Cans would be immune
from prosecution under Section 3si OF
the Penal Law il they were allowed to
give sworn testimony before the grand
jury, despite any waivers Of immunity
they might make. In the face Of this
warning Schiff was called as witness.
though a majority of the grand jury
voted against calling Cans.
Two efforts were necessary by the
grand jury yesterday to present a report
satisfactory 10 Judge Grain. The first
one did not refer TO the conspiracy
charges, but took up the question of why
Brandt was in the Schiff house on tho
night of March s, 1907.
Grand Jurys Rejected Report.
The essential paragraphs Of 1t read as
follows:
We have examined forty-one witnesses
in the John Doe proceeding instituted be
fore us and growing out Of the so-called
Brandt case. We have further examined
mass Of documentary evidence, including
court records, official correspondence, etc.
We are forced to the conclusion that the
evidence submitted to the grand jury OF
this county in March, 1907, together WIN
| the additional evidence submitted 10 US
| falls to establish the crime Of burglary IN
the first degree, but does esta bish 20 our
minds beyond any question Of doubt mat
| the presence OF Brandt in the residence
| of Mr. NJ l.. Schif was for the purpose oi
committing grand larceny.
The vote on making a report in this
form was taken on Wednesday, and the
report was made UP yesterday after
committee Of five members Of the grand
| Jury. headed by James Buckley. the fore
man. had had a forty-five minute con-
| ference with District Attorney Whitman.
Wher the committee returned TO the
| grand jury room after the conference
| sounds of handclapping were heard. and
! shortly afterward the jurors filed out OF
| the room and proceeded to Part ii, OF
General Sessions. where Judge Grain
was holding court
The report was handed up by Buckley
and promptly returned by Judge Grain
after reading it. The Judge said:
| You have handed me a paper which I
| have read and which I feel constrained
| to return TO your foreman, inasmuch az u
| embraces matters not within me scope Oh
inquiry as conducted by YOU. IL you 80"
| At to retire and desire upon consideration
| to file with this court paper desCrlolhs
sufficiently the inquiry you nave conducted.
together with the conclusions reacheh as
| the result of that inquiry II Will D" rs-
| ceived and filed as a court record.
After this the jury retired once more
TO the grand jury room for another at
tempt at repop., S@d this time they
were successful in producing one that
would be accepted. Buckley went with
| District Attorney Whitman for fifteen
minute consultation with Judge Grain
and the District Attorney was called
twice afterward into the grand jury
room.
Grand Jury's Second Report
Three-uuarters of an hour after the
first report had been offered and refused
the grand jury returned to Judge cram
with the second report. In II the para
graph referring TO Brandt had been
changed to read as follows:
H,v,no under cons nsioeration the question:
as 20 whether any indictment should DO
brouaht on any charge Of conspiracy grow
Inu out OF said case, we are intcrmeo oy
tho District Attorney that we have hearo
all the evidence TO be presented on the sub
lect Such evidence, in our opinion does
not require the finding OF indictments
The remainder Of the report was de-
voted To thanking the court for cour-
teous treatment. and recording apprecia-
ton Of the energy fidelity and fairness
with which the District Attorney had
conducted the investigation. This re-
port was received by Judge Grain ana
made a part OF the records OF the court
He said this time:
You have handed me through your fore
man a paper which is received by the court
and which will be placed on the files Ok
the court The main purpose OF nling THIS
paper is that there may he a matter or
court record, clear and precise. az 10 the
subject matter which has been under con-
slderation by you. and that the matter
may not hereafter at any other time occu.
py the attention Of either yourselves or OF
any other grand jury, unless permission lor
the reconsideration Of II Is obtained from
Judge OF the Court Of General Sessions OF
Justice of the Supreme Court.
Having thus received the report OF the
grand jury. Judge Grain. before dls-
charging them. delivered a speech OF
some length on the subject OF the secrecy
Of grand jury proceedings. He said: