The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1916-1920, 1919-04-18
VIM. HAMLIN CHILDS
MUST STAND TRIAL
Appellate Division Upholds
Dismissal of Writ Against
Fusion Leader.
ORDERED TO THE TOMBS
Conspiracy Charge Grew Out
Of Expense Reports in the
Mitchell Campaign.

BY Diminishing a writ OF habeas corpus
obtained in July last by William Hamlin
Childs and sustained in September by
Justice Finch, the Appellate Division OF
ti,s Supreme Court made effective yes
terday the three indictments found
against Mr.. Childs. accusing him OF con-
spiracy TO violate the election law by
failure to report to the Secretary OF
State payments Of 5000 to ex-Gov. Sui
ger and $500 to Misha Appelbaum for
services in the Mitchell campaign Of
1917.
The Appellate Division reversed JUS
tics Finch and ordered that Mr.. Childs,
who was chairman of the fusion execu-
tive committee. be sent to the Tombs to
await trial. Through his attorneys,
John B. Stanchfeld, 'Isidor Kresel and
J. Arthur Levi. Mr.. Childs will take an
appeal TO the Court of Appeals.
Meanwhile he will ask for a stay OF
execution of the Appellate Division q
order. II this Is granted he need not
go to prison pending tho Court of APP
reals decision. Otherwise he probably
will be required to visit the warden long
enough to have himself bailed out.
Mr.. Childs spent twenty minutes In
the Tombs on July % last-long enough
20 register and sign the habeas corpus
writ. Later. in the sustaining writ, JUS
tice Finch said there was no ground for
the indictments.
Appellate Divisions Opinion.
With Mr.. Childs were indicted Mr.
Sulzer and Josiah T. Newcomb, ex-
state Senator. The majority opinion OF
the Appellate Division, written by JUS
tice Frank C. Laughlin. says:
THE facts as charged In these indict-
rlents show clearly that the defendants
deliberately combined and planned to
bring about the violation of the pro-
vision OF Section 546 of the election Law
By Clarke as such treasurer (of the
fusion committees city publicity COM
raitteO by inducing him TO file this
ialse and incomplete statement. II the
facts are as charged there can be nc
Loubt that the defendants knew full well
that what they set out to accomplish
was In violation of the law"
Justice Laughlin's opinion was con-
Cured in by Justices Clarence J. Shearr
and Edgar S. X. Merrell. John Proctor
Clarke, Presiding Justice, also agreed
with 1t, but said he believed the deci.
on the fact that 'habeas corpus Is no,
10 be used as writ Of error and tina,
an Indictment properly found return &c
q court OF competent Jurisdiction can.
not be so tested" Justice Alfred r
Page. in a dissenting opinion, commended
that the majority decision unduly limit,
the operation OF the writ OF habeas cor
pus. the great object of which Is tn,
liberation of those who may be impris
oned without sufficient cause
Messrs. Childs. Sulzer and Newcomb
the last named having had charge of tn,
organization division of the fusion com
mittee, were charged In Indictment
found on May s, 1918, with having com
btned to cause Treasurer Clarke to omi
the payments to Mr. Sulzer and Mr.. Ap
pelbaum, who Is head of the Humani
tartan Cult. from the list reported to tn,
Secretary Of State.
Conspiracy Point Upheld.
Conspiracy. Justice Laughlin holds
VAS sufficiently charged In the indict
n!ents. He also says:
when the Legislature saw At to ex
tend its supervision over such commit
tees I think 1t Is not unreasonable t
construe these provisions as authorizing
the prosecution Of such committees anC
officers for failure to perform their du
ties. am of the opinion that
the relator Mr.. Childsl wa
not entitled to have the validity Of tn
indictment tested by habeas corpus
Habeas corpus Is not a remedy In
criminal action or proceeding or one Il
tho nature thereof; but is a civil specia
proceeding to inquire into the cause O
restraint or detention and to enforce
civil right to be released from restraint
custody or confinement. . w
find that habeas corpus Ia not q remed
for testing the sufficiency OF an indlct
ment or OF the evidence upon which 1
was found"
District Attorney Swami refraine
from comment on the decision He 1
awaiting the next move of the defenc
in the fusion fund inquiry" Mr.. Child
and Mr.. Kresel were out of the city yes
terday and Mr.. Stanchfield is Ill.
In replying to the charges last yea
Mr.. Childs said there was no attempt I
conceal anything. He said that he ad
vanced 1880 to ex-Gov. Sulxer an
Mr.. Appelbaum when there was nc
enough In the treasury; that he told tn
committee about this payment and tina
in the cleanup OF unpaid bills after tn
campaign the treasurer paid him tn
S11,500.