The Bridgeport evening farmer., 1915-04-30
TWO NEW HAVEN
 DIRECTORS ESCAPE
 U. s. PROSECUTION
Indictments Against James S. Elton and William Skinner
 Are Dismissed

New York; April 3O-United States Circuit Judge Hunt dismissed yester- day the indictments against James s. Elton and William Skinner, New Haven directors, holding that they are immune from prosecution under the Sherman law because they testified l before the Interstate Commerce Com mission under circumstances showing
 that they asserted the privilege of inn munity. \ The indictment against Edward D. | Robbins, former counsel and director,
 was sustained, though MT. Robbins had interposed four pleas, including
 pleas of immunity, because he testi- fled before the Interstate Commerce Commission and the Grand Jury
 which investigated the New Haven
 and the Grand Trunk.
 Robbins Was a Voluntary Witness
 In the Robbins case Assistant At torney General Swacker contended that the defendant tried to "filch immunity by appearing before the Interstate Commerce Commission. No subpoena was served on him and he was not compelled to take the stand, and Commissioners Prouty was on guard to see that MT. Robbins did not get immunity, MT. Swacker said.
 'It cannot be inferred from the cir
 cumstances- which the defendant has
 
 Judge Hunt, that he ever meant to assert a claim to immunity
 The decisions were made on the
 superseding indictments. To the ori- ginaI indictments Messrs. Elton and HI Skinner also pleaded immunity. Tn ese January last. In his opinion he re- cited the main points of Senator Nor ris's resolution directing the Inter state Commerce Commission to inves- 1T 1Sf,1 fEoS s<,f 4I1o
 Haven with a view to restitution of < whatever money had been rnisapplied -It is quite clear said Judge I l#Grubb, that if these recita1s correct 4 vestig igation the power of the Comn1iS- sion to compel the attendance and s testimony of witnesses did not exist. Judge Hunt takes note of Judge a Grubbs opinion, but holds that points made in the pleas to the superseding g Grubb's opinion with the presump- ton that the Interstate Commerce I 1 Commission had power to compel wit S nesses to testify.
 The New Points Made
 One of these new points was that 4 Lewis CaSs Ledyard was required to I waive immunity before he was per
 nitted to testify. Another was that John W. H. Grim. attorney for Presi- dent Helen, had been instructed by Il MT AAe410h to SDCJ 1OI OL1l6I- OlT0CLOESs
 and in conversation with Prosecutor
 Folk had formed the impression that H lau witnesses were to have immunity,
 unless, as. in MT. Ledyard's case, spe-
 officially stated to the contrary #l Messrs. Elton and Skinner were fa- T vored also by the cifcunstance that
 before their testimony H. B. Whipple 5 and Samuel Hemingway had been T threatened with prosecution if they
 refused to answer questions.
 MT. Elton, aAretired banker of Wa A terbury, Conn.,, had been a, director o.
 the New Haven since 1905, and MT
 Skinner, a silk manufacturer of Hol ,F yoke, Mass, and New York, had beer one since 1902. From the viewpoin
 of the Government. MT. Swacker said
 MT. Skinner was considered the nor,
 important defendant.
 With the indictment against thes
 two dismissed, the number of Ney of Haven defendants is now nineteen lg Separate trials have been granted t. at George F. Baker, Theodore N. Vail h IT. De Witt Cuyler, Francis T. Max SC well and Edward Milligah. EdEar,
 D. Robbins stands in a class by a.m of self. John L.. Billiard has a plea il h. abatement before the court
 is The Government has been ordere to to supply, a. bill of particulars to tn "a other tWelve-WiIliam Rockefeller George-M. Miller, Charles F. Brooke1 - James $. Hemingway, Lewis Gas = = Ledyard, Charles M Pratt, A. Heatol ~ Robertson, Frederick F. Brewster = Henry K. ,McHarg and Alexande
 Cochrane.