The New York herald., 1920-01-15
,continued from Page oneo

Jurors in the office of Mr.. Almirall. No. Il
East Forty-sixth street. II was in reply
to two letters written to the jury by the
Governor at the time Joseph NJ. Pros
kauer. the second lawyer suggested oy
Mr.. Smith as adviser to the body, had de-
clined because he could not induce the
District Attorney to permit him TO appoint
separate staff of assistants not con-
nected with Mr.. Swan1's office.
Governor Smiths .1rst letter was sent on
November % last. and was followed by
another on December 26 when the Cover
nor refused to designate another lawyer
as adviser TO the body, and declared that
If the body had any charges to make
agains Mr.. Swami he would entertain
them nd would designate the Attorney
General to act in the matter IL he found
the charges warranted action.
The Grand Jurys letter to the Governor
says in part
''It is with much satisfaction that the
Grand Jury notes from your last commu-
nication that you have finally come into
accord with its prior conclusions i'm respect
to the necessity OF counsel being indepen-
dent of the District Attorneys office.
"NOt Duty Of Grand Jury"
1.-The Grand Jury cannot help but feel.
however, that the alternative proposed by
yoIr Excellency-that the Grand Jury
should at the present stage of the inquiry
formulate charges against the District At
torney. and that 1t should prefer such
charges before your Excellency-is coupled
with conditions which are neither legally
function or duty OF the Grand Jury nor
cons stent with the public interests. Your
Exce,lency's letters also permit, unnten-
tionslly but equally unfortunately, public
misapprehension both as to the suggestion
Of MI. Battles name and as to the declina-
ton by Mr.. Proskauer of the appointment
as Assistant District Attorney; as we'll as
in other matters"
The letter then reviews the incidents
leading up TO the naming of Messrs. Bat
tie and Proskauer as counsel for the
Grand Jury. and adds
The plain inference from Your Excel
lency's letter and subsequent statements
is that the designation Of Mr.. Battle was
supposed to be in compliance with the
GrG-6 Jury's request This was obvious
ly inaccurate.
'Mr. Battles appointment was consum-
mated with unusual celerity. 1t was
cheerfuly welcomed by those most direct
iy involved in the Investigations. The
selection was both a shock and q surprise
TO tho Grand Jury for, although the APP
pointee is an able lawyer of recognized
honor and position.
During the last month numerous addi-
tional complaints affecting the offices OF
the District Attorney and municipality
have been received. which emphasize the
need OF the Grand Jury Investigations al
ready initiated. They are of sufficiently
serious character to justify, il not impera-
Aserzt tfz,.
"It is the desire OF the Grand Jury to
give thoughtful and candid consideration
to Your Excellencys invitation that 1t pre-
fer charges against the District Attorney
Even though Grand Jury should not
indict a public official. il still has the duty
to inquire into the misconduct of such off,
GERS In proper cases IL should make a
presentnent not. however, TO the Gov
ernor. but to the court TO which it was
returned and by which II is discharged
such was the decision Of tho Appellate
Division of the Supreme Court.
Nowhere in the statutes. either ex