The New York herald. [volume] (New York, N.Y.) 1920-1924, 1920-12-17
SWANN'S OFFICE
CALLED BURDEN
UPON TAXPAYERS
1t Costs More Than $640, 900
a Year to Run District
Attorneys Place.
HE ESCAPED REMOVAL
Gov. Whitman Criticised for
Failure to Take Tip in
Findings on Charges.
TERN EXPIRES NEXT YEAR
Two Of His Assistants, Though
Indicted, Still Members
of His Staff.
TERM EXPIRES NEXT YEAR

On6 OF the DuFueiS w lic
taxpayers of Manhattan Borough is
the office of the District Attorney.
That office, the greatest criminal law
office in the world, is at present
headed by Edward Swami. He has
been elected twice to that important
post. His term of office expires De-
cember 81, 1921 He tried to get on
the Supreme Court bench at the last
election, but the voters failed to elect
him Tammany Hall, which has ia
,thered SWANS political activities, did
Its share by giving him the nomi-
nation over several aispirants inside
the ranks of the organization.
Whether he will again be favored at
their hands for political place is yet
to be determined.
, For many years Tammany has
thought seriously about letting the
Republicans, F'usionists or almost any
other party take the patronage that
goes with this great office. The Hall
liked the Jobs that were in the giving
of the District Attorney, but history
shows that It has not been fortunate In
the men they picked for this plum.
One, Col. Asa Bird Gardiner, was re-
moved by a Governor; another,
: Swami, missed it. although charges
looking to his removal were filed and
=. thrashed out at great length
whitman Failed to Take Tip.
- Gov Whitman. Republican, was
criticised by some of his party when he
failed to take the tip given in the report
by former Supreme Court Justice George
T.. Ingraham. who heard the charges that
. were fathered by the City Club that
Swami had tried to deceive the court In
, "a series of labor cases that he found In
'his office when he became District At
torney.
Tammany went so far as to indorse
Whitman when he ran for reelection as
District Attorney. from which place he
AZ stepped to the Governorship.
= Judge Ingraham was not especially
complimentary to Judge Swami in his
findings on the charge. He had heard
witness after witness In the labor row
that resulted from a garment WORKERS
>, strike In 1917. He saw the witnesses
Perjury had been committed all along
. the line Some had perjured themselves.
. He was certain of that. Evidence given
.xyin one place was recanted in another.
Swami caused the indictment Of some of
them.
After all was said and done Judge
--Ingraham wrote:
"As ! read this testimony the whole
power Of the public prosecutor was used
not for the enforcement Of criminal law
- or the punishment of crime, but to ex-
~ tort from the witnesses upon whose tes-
y, 1an H.
~ tained a retraction OF their testimony.
EVERY one of these witnesses who
was willing to meet the views of the
- District Attorney and his assistant was
then discharged, but every one who in
~ sisted that his testimony was true was
~ detained in prison. subject to a convic-
. ton and a long term of imprisonment
- From this evidence as 1t stands the con-
clusion is irresistible that II Judge Dele
=hanty had not filed the memorandum
that he did and If formal charges had
not been made and presented against the
District Attorney there would have been
no further investigation and no indict-
ment for perjury"
lanes A Deehanty was an Assistant
District Attorney under Whitman and
appointed to the Court of General Ses-
slons bench AS an assistant ne had
caused the Indictment Of a number OF
n.
that Swami proposed to kick the cases
out OF his office This action resulted
In the charges being filed
Views of Judiciary Committee.
Judge Swami did not have the sup
port OF the Association of the Bar In
his candidacy for the Supreme Court
i, bench. On the question OF his fitness
the judiciary committee wrote:
T. ~, az
y not noteworthy and his services as a
Il. Judge of the Court OF General Sessions
were not satisfactory. His rulings were
severely criticised by the Court Of APP
peals and by the Appellate Division.
:. Reviewing a trial over which Judge
Swami presided and referring 10 some
80 Of his rulings, the Court of Appeals felt
constrained 70 say that the efficient in
nuence of the court Is largely dependent
upon the opinions which the community
entertalns In regard 10 their ability and
the frequent commission even OF harm
:, less errors Is not conducive TO public
confidence. We refer here not to rul-
'ings upon debatable questions OF law.
-. concerning which there may we'll be
~ differences Of opinion among good law
~ yers, but to mistakes which are patent
upon the slightest consideration
Nor has the management OF the Of
M nee OF l)lSIlct AlloIHey uuIlHb lfle Hdt
Ave years under Mr.. Swami been salts
factory or such as to indicate that he
has the necessary qualifications for so
important a judicial office as that OF a
Justice OF the Supreme Court
Judge Swami has not administered
:, his duty in conformity with long estab-
80 lished standards. but on the contrary.
has resorted to the practice of terroriz-
y ing defendants In criminal cases and OF
- seeking TO obtain discriminating evidence
. from them by oppressive methods More
~ over. he has departed from the proper
4. and orderly methods of administering
criminal Justice by frequently making
= public for sensational purposes evidence
procured by him professedly to be sub
mitted to the Grand Jury. Although the
statutes make this officer the legal ad-
"a wiser of the Grand Jury, one Grand
Jury, still In session. refused 10 accept
his counsel and applied to the Governor
for substitute"
Magistrate Joseph u. Corrigan when
n candidate against Swami for the Dis
- trict Attcrneyship, running as an inde-
pendent frequently attacked the incum-
bent. SO did William l.. Ransom. who