The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1915-09-21
BROKER RENOUNCES
ROBBINS; ASKS FOR
A SEPARATE TRIAL
New Haven Director Says the
Hearing With Roads Ex-Coun-
sci Would Prejudice Jury.
LEDYARD AND M'HARG
MAKE LIKE REQUESTS

'DullStl VI tlt ANtW maven ram u "'h
some of the defendants indicted with
him for violating the Sherman law came
yesterday when Charles +. Brooker filed
a petition for severance In the United
States District Court In which he stated
frankly that he did not wish to be
tried with Robbins. His reason for ask
ing a separate trial was that the evil
dcnce which the Government intends TO
introduce against Robbins might preju-
dice the jury against the petitioner as
well.
II Is evident from the nature OF the
Brooker application that some OF the
defendants intend at the trial to re-
pudiate The alleged acts OF Robbins. at
least to the extent of declaring that
they never would have voted for the
absorption OF subsidiaries and for other
transactions which the Government
complains OF had not Robbins. as gen.
ersi counsel, advised them that the
acts were perfectly legal. 1t will be
recalled in this connection that Rob-
bins not only, according to record, APP
proved OF the absorption of the sub
salaries, but actually formed many OF
the concerns which afterward figured In
the involved transfer of the assets of
the purchased companies.
The evidence against Robbins to
which the Brooker petition refers con-
Germs personal profits said TO have been
made by Robbins In his work for the
New Haven ompany and his alleged
responsibility for the spiriting away OF
the books of the Billiard Company at a
time when the Government was particu-
larry anxious to get them.
separate Trials for Others.
Petitions for separate trials were also
made by Charles NJ. Pratt. Lewis Cass
Ledyard. Henry *. McHarg and Fred
erick +. Brewster. who base their APP
plication on more technical grounds. Mr..
ledyard. however. refutes in his petit
ton the charge made by Assistant
United States Attorney-General Swacker
in "A recent bill Of particulars that he.
Ledyard. had worked diligently through
official circles to forestall the prosecu-
ton OF the New Haven directors.
Mr.. Ledyard admits that he had a
talk In 1913 with NV Taft, then Presi-
dent, and George w Tickersham, then
Acknowledgement, and now Mr.. Led
ysrd's attorney. He insists that he
merely convinced the President and the
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT that no God could
rome of prosecuting the New Haven
rem at that time. considering the at
ttude OF the public, Mr.. Ledyard says
that the facts concerning his interviews
with the President and Mr.. Wickersham
were told by him before the Interstate
Commerce Commission.
AT the time of these interviews" says
the petitioner, MIR. Mellen was under
Indictment In connection with certain
negotiat lens with the Grand Trunk Rail-
road. a matter with which l had no
connection whatever. as II occurred
wholly during my absence in Europe
during 1912. He meaning Charles ;.
Mellenl stated to me after his indiCt-
ment that the Grand Jury was continu-
ing its sessions, and from the witnesses
called before it and the limitations given
in the ~wspap he believed the Gov
eminent officials In charge OF that in
yestlgation were endeavoring to go back
TO the acquisition OF the New Haven
many years before.
81 felt tina such action on the part or
the Administration ut that time might
have very serious results upon the credit
and soivency Of the New Haven com
nan and 7 openly went to the Attorney
General and to the President and urged
upon them that in the then existing con-
dillon of the public mind and In view OF
the then prevalent attacks upon the New
Haven road no public good Could De
served by such action. The President
and Acknowledgement both agreed WIN
ne.
No secret, says LedyRrd.
''rAc Acknowledgement afterward In
formed me that he had accordingly IN
strtcted his subordinates in charge Of
tho Investigation To limit their inquiries
" 49, f1rnpl vNrttpl matter. which mac
alone led to any investigation btlnl
made. made no secret OF this actor
on my part. | was perfectly frank WIKI
the President and with the Attorney
General, believing that | had the rlgh'
10 make the protest which | dld make
and I was confirmed in my impression
by their act
Originally twenty-nne men were in
.dlctcd In the New Haven case, Tire
were granted immunity and five were
given "A separate trial. II the appl.ca
lions Of those who asked for separate
trlals Yesterday are granted II VIII leave
only eight defendants, including
Rrooker, william Rockefeller anr
Itonert W TAFT, as defendants at III
initial trial I'm October.
In outlining the reasons why hit
client docs not wish to he tried WIZ
Robbins, Rayall Victor, attorney 10
BROKER. r. calls paragraphs ~ ana J.
In the Governments bill OF particulars
tho former charging that Robbins durlni
three years preceding the indictmen
nrocurrd or aided in procuring the re
moval to Canada of the assets, book
and papos of the Billiard Company
Til property. it is charged, was theI
turned over to the 81. Lawrence Sc
Curitlcs Ltd, which was formed b.
Robbins for that purpose.
Parncraph - outlines the charge tha
Robbins made 5000, 600 "on the side il
connection with his work in the acquisi
lion OF the assets of the metropolitan
Steamship Company. the Morse concerl
which was swallowed up 10y the New
Haven. The paragraph also charge
that Robbins, while engineering the I'm
rricate deal through which the Metro
politan assets found their tortuous wa
into the fold Of the New Haven. secret.
sent the Morse lines two biggest boat,
TO the Pacific coast, whore they hecam,
the property Of the Pacific company
Subsequently, I is alleged he transferre,
TO his wife certain shares OF the Pacih,
company, also a part Of the proceeds O
the said transaction"
"a great deal of this evidence" say
Mr.. Victor, (which VIII clearly be al
MISSILE against the defendant Robin
on the issue Of the guilty knowledge O
intent OF Robbins, and which viii clcarl
not be admissible against the d fendln
Brooker, viii be grossly prejudIcial 1
Rrooker, particularly upon the issues q
motive and intent, and viii IN fact be $
pr~ciudicial that, upon "A joint trial q
these two defendants, no instruction
which the court can give will Offset IN