Evening journal., 1920-01-16

I
medlalely at the time Of their discharge
from the workhousc.
"Of course n Your Honors think that
/ 70 Is better 10 have the names OF dis
] charged prl5oners Immediately upon
/ their release submitted 20 the police
authorities ] am willing noihwiih-
standing my personal Views, 10 act as
/ Your HOnOrs should desire.
In addition 10 that, In order 90 re-
fresh my recollection. ] went over The
matter with Mr.. Leonard Crawford who
/ was warden OF the Institution up until
/ the early part OF 1915. he called my at
tention 10 the fact that the board Of
trustees had already established such a
department In the workhouse proper;
that We had authorized and in
siructed him TO purchase and secure
the necessary Photographic instruments
etc. and that he had done so; that dur
ing the balance OF his term Of oiilce
he had an expert operator taking the
photographs OF the prisoners within
/ The wOrkhOuse and that he had himself
been taught by this operator 10 carry
on the work and that he had done this
up until the time he had resigned from
I the wOrkhOuse.
IAN application has been made for the
pardon OF a prisoner. One OF the causes
assigned was the illness Of the prisoner.
/ The Workhouse Physician stated that
she was In fair condition. I thought the
Board OF Pardons 20 whom the appl-
I cation was made. needed further proof
OF the physical condition Of the prls-
Oner and ! asked Doctor John Palmer,
/ Jr.. one OF our most esteemed. most
prominent, most skllful and most
learned In his profession and one whom
| everybody knows could not be persuad-
/ ed on any account 10 give out a false
statement knowing it 10 be false, 10
visit the institution and make IN OK
animation OF the prisoner. Al my re-
quct he went there, unaccOOmpanied
BY me. stated his object, was admitted,
made the examination and made a re-
port OF the same 10 the Board OF Par
dOns. His statement wis direct oppo-
site OF the statement made by the
Workhouse Physician.
IN dolng this I did nothing more
| than any other attorney In the proper
performance OF his duty would have
done.
The nfth charge cited against me
was that I had refused the request OF
Warden Cross and Sergeant Green, Of
the Detective Bureau. TO visit the work
house and 20 take photographs and fin
ger-prints Of the inmates thereof. and.
by my refusal, had prevented this being
! done. I remember saying upon one
occasion, whether TO Sergeant Green
or not I am not sure. that my opinion
was that after man had been duly
convicted and sentenced 10 the work
house the board Of trustees had no
power 10 permit any person so COM
milted 10 their charge % see anyone
when he had expressed a desire that
ne did not care 10 see such one; that
I also thought that we had no power
90 premit someone from the outside
20 come IN and take his photograph
and fnEcr-prints n he, the prisoner. OBJ
leoted 20 the same. This was merely an
expression Of belief by one member Of
the board Of trustees, and so far as /
know never any request was made by
the detective department, Attorney Cen
eral Renhardt or anyone else 10 the
board OF trustees FOR such permission.
"The sixth charge against me Is as
follows:
"Upon one occasion a prisoner was
applying dor a pardon and was rep
resented by Mr.. Ball. One Of the
grounds Of the petition was the
health Of the prisoner. The work
house physician examined the pris-
oner and found him fairly healthy. Then
Mr.. Ball, without any authority or per-
mission Of anybody and without n0tiil-
cation 10 the workhouse physician, had
his client examined by two outside
physicians. who gave certificate Of
poor health, which certificate was used
with the petition for a pardon" (The
party presenting this matter TO the
grand Jury relied on his imagination
for his facts and his memory for his
figures. In the frst place. 10 was not a
man who was making the application,
but a woman. In the second place
there was no examination made by two
outside physicians) The facts Of the
case are simply these:
$50 Your Honors can readily see that
a little less hasty examination and a
little less desire on the part OF some
one to iniure me. might have resulted
in the whole truth OF these matters be-
ing presented TO the grand jury.
The board Of trustees have had 10
bear the blame for many things for
which lt Is not in anywise accounta- |
ble.-for instance.-James Nields was
lately sentenced by your Honorable /
Court and committed 10 the Board Of |
Trustees OF the New Castle County |
Workhouse. After this sentence in I
place OF our warden being permitted .
TO receive him into his custody aud I
convey him 10 the workhouse as direct Z
ed by the Court. Attorney-General .
Reinhardt took him In possession,
handed him over to one Of his State
Detectives and permitted him TO go to
the Hotel dupont and partake OF a
meal. The board Of trustees OF the [.
workhouse were criticised most Sc /
verely both by the press and the pub
lie generally for this act and properly |
criticised had Il been true. yet the At
torney- General knowing full well Of 4
this criticism. never at any time stated /
10 The public that he was responsible
for this and not the trustees OF the
workhouse.
II desire 10 repeat 10 Your Honors
without fear Of contradiction, that at
no time during the whole twenty years
that ! have been connected with the