The sun., 1916-12-28
JUDGE MOTT ORDERS
ROBERT WOOD TRIED
Court Refuses Prosecutors Re.
quest to Dismiss Bribery
Indictment.
AMAZING, SAYS SWAMI
Both Jurist and District Att0r-
ney Insist Politics Isn't
Involved.

Judge Charles c. Mott Of the Court Of
General Sessions refused yesterday the
request Of District Attorney Swami to
dismiss q bribery indictment against for
msr Public Service Commissioner Robert
Colgate Wood. and accompanied the ~.
fusai with an opinion which stirred the
Criminal Courts Building like an explo-
sion.
The District Attorney recommended
that the Indictment, which was procured
by himself on January 25. shortly after
he took office. be dismissed because Of
the impossibiilty OF getting 2 conviction
on the charge that Wood offered to &C.
cspt 5000 to use his influence AZ q
Public Service Commissioner to get the
Union Switch and Signal Company's bid
n contract accepted by the commits
sion.
Judge Mott In an opinion which might
be characterised as severe declined to
accept tn, District Attorneys view that
. conviction IL impossible. and added
that the case must be brought to trial
because public policy demands that .
public oficer accused Of . felony must
have q public trial. whether the result be
exoneration or conviction. He criticised
unsparingly the District Attorneys rea-
sons for desiring to drop the case.
No Politics, They say.
Both Judge Mott and District Attor-
ney Swami insisted last night that there
was, nothing personal or political hidden
At the back of the controversy. but It
was observed that friends OF each ON
ella were inclined to read into the dis
agreement something moro than . for
nal n technical difference between two
Law officers.
Mr.. Wood. II will be recalled. was
indicted largely on testimony given be-
fore the Grand Jury BY Sidney @. John.
son, who was an oficer Of tho Union
Switch and Signal Company. that Wood
solicited q 5000 bride. Certain state
ments made by Col. Henry c. Prout.
who was the president Of tho signal
concern, and by the directors Of the
concern. to whom johnson IL alleged TO
have reported the solicitation, also hg-
ured In the bribery indictment. After
working on the case nearly q year Dis
trict Attorney Swami satisfied himself.
he says, that johnson II an unwilling
witness who might be considered an &C.
complete that the directors Of the Union
Switch and Signal Company would testify
that johnson was an accomplish, and
that Col. Prout could only testify to
impressions" Therefore re rut the dis
missed recommendation UP to Judge
Mott. In his decision Judge Mott said /:
Tho Recommendation of the District
Attorney IL based on two reasons: First.
that the success Of the prosecution de-
ponds on the testimony Of Sidney @.
johnson, that johnson Is an unwilling
witness. that his testimony Ii vague and
that by his recent acts and declarations
he has manifested his hostility and has
refused to discuss the casa further sec.
ond, that there v a question Of FEC In
the case as to whether or not johnson V
an accomplicc Of tho defendant. Il being
evident that he 10 an accompiice, the
necessary corroboration Of his testimony
u lacking.
Public Policy.
principle that when an Indictment for
felony Is returned against . public Of
fcer holding an important position
public policy requires that the case be
publicly tried unless II 10 perfectly ap-
parent that under no possible circum-
stances a the prosecution succeed,
especially where II Is evident that the
trial OF the case cannot be q prolonged
n unduly burdening the parties thereto
or unduly o~bstructins other public busi-
ness.
In this case. while the evidence Of
johnson In certain respects Is indefinite,
yet II It il believed by the Jury that he
IL not an accomplish, a prima facie case
against the defendant is made out. The
fact that johnson may be an unwilling
witness does not necessarily weaken the
case. Very often the fact that a Wit
ness IL unwilling and Is testifyina
against his inclination adds strength &c
his testimony. The fact that johnson
has refused to discuss the case further
or aid In It's further prosecution does
not prove by any means that he will
u the risk OF an indictment for per.
Jury by changing the testimony already
given by him On his testimony no Is
not an accomplish. and should testimony
be given by the defence tending to prove
that he In. an issue of fact on that cues.
ton would be presented which should
be submitted to the jury. and It IL i'm.
possible to say how that question
should be resolved by them. II Is evi.
dent h a the trial Of the action mus
be brief. as the witnesses are yer,
limited In number and the trial cannot
unduly burden the parties or obstruc'
the calendar.
Tho defendant. q public officer hold
inE an important position. has beer In
oicted Tor a serious crime. II he Is In
nocent he IL entitled to a public trial ant
v~indication. II he Is guilty he should b.
convicted n punished. AZ the recon-,
mendation Of tho District Attorne,
SHOWS a prtma facfe case against hin
mas been made out, and falls to SHOW
thAt u cannot be sustained upon trial
In my judgment the public interest re-
Quires that a trial should be had for In,
reasons stated. I cannot approve O
the recommendation that either the in,
dictment should be dismissed or theb bal
discharged"
Swsna's Statement.
When this decision wal reported Il
District Attorney Swami things began n
nun In that officials private once. M,
swami Immediately gave out 4 state
ment saying:
II hope Judge Mott will try the case
! snail ask him to do 80. Eyidentlv IN
does not agree with his associate. Juds
Wadhams, who granted the motion 4
inspect the minutes OF the Grand Jur,
n gave permission that the motion 10
the dismissal Of the indictment be mad
on the merits of the case. Judge Wad
hams publicly said that the indlctmen
should be dismissed.
AT the time Wood was indicted
shoueht there was suiicient cause 70
ection. Tho testimony was presented I
tne Grand Jury before ! became Distric
Attorney. ] knew then that II was in
adequate n tried to bolster II up an
make a case, II will be utterly impos
sible to obtain a conviction, as the EVIL
dence'is not sufficient"
Judge Mott did not think n mn. 4