Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1922-01-24
JAPS DECLARE HAVE NO DESIGNS
IN S|BERA:-T0 WITHDRAW FORCES
WITH RESTORATION OF ORDER
COUNSEL REED IN ARGUMENT
TOBREAK Down STATES CASE
AGAINST CLIENT PELLET|ER

Boston, Jan. 23.-Counsel for Dis
trict Attorney Joseph c. Pelletier,
charged IN removal proceedings before
the supreme court with malfeasance,
sumed all Of todays session with their
hnal arguments. Attorney General ].
Weston Alien. who filed the informa-
tion seeking Pelletier's removal, will
conclude the case tomorrow with the
states arguments.
Senator James A. Reed Of Missouri,
senior counsel for Pelletier, spoke for
more than four hours, and Louis c.
Boyle OF Washington, former attor-
ney general Of Kansas, associate coun-
sci. occupied the floor for an hour.
In addition TO a brief review of the
81 cases cited by the prosecution as
instances OF ALLEGED misconduct, the
arguments included a discussion of the
law relative to admission of circum-
stantial evidence and as to the dis
cretionary powers of the district at
torney.
Boyle cOntended that Pelletier was
him as prosecuting attorney and
that in none Of the cases had the gov
eminent shown an improper motive.
He argued also that the government
had no basis for charges made in sew
cral OF the cases that Pelletier was
guilty Of misconduct because he retain
cd in Office assistants who had handled
cases improperly. contending that
while mistakes might have been made.
no improper motive had been proved
nor had 1t been showp th.t Telletier
personally was familiar with the ac-
ton OF the assistants at the time the
action was taken.
Senator Reed opened his lengthy
argument with an arraignment of
prosecution witnesses who he char2-
Cd were impeled by improper motives
in testifying against Pelletier. He
urged particularly that the testimony
OF Robert +. Matches to the effect
that Matches understood that Fellet:er
was TO get $4,000 Of $50, 800 fee
paid by the Emerson Motors Co. Of
New York to avert prosecution, be
disregarded. Matches. he argued. was
convicted felon and in his opinion
gave perjured testimony.
The government contends in this
case that Pelletier conspired with
Daniel ". Coakley. a Boston lawyer.
to extort. by threatening prosecution
against the Emerson company, the sum
OF SEQ 800. Senator Reed argued that
II was immaterial what Coakiey re-
celvcd: that Pelletier actually dropped
the Prosecution after he had conduct
ed an inquiry in his office and had OBJ
tanned the promise of officers of the
automobile company to discontinue
stock advertising in Boston. to pro-
coed with the manufacture CT auto
mobiles and to refund purchase money
to any stock purchaser who was dis
satisfied. He declared that the dis
trict attorneys judgment was sound
as an indictment would have meant
great loss to stockholders.
Senator Reed devoted considerable
time 10 arguing against the admission
Of records OF the bank accounts Of
I OakIFN anu ItIlNlIti, utNidl' hS ti'
were admitted during the trial on the
promise of the prosecution to connect
them with the charges. but that this
had not been done. A motion to strike
out that part of the evidence is now
before the court Money transactions
between Coakley and Pelletier were
alleged by the state in four of the 81
cases presented.
senator Reed concluded his argu-
mcnt with the statement that it SEEM
I'd strange to him that the state had
selected alleged instances of miscon-
duct in only three of the II years of
relletier's tenure as district attorney
and that "a microscopic examination
Of the more than 10000 cases handled
during the IL years had allowed even
an inhamed imagination to cite only
Il cases against the district attorney.