Evening journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1888-1932, 1922-12-15
FRANTzES and
HOOK GIVE UP
$4,000 FINES

and has been found thus lat 70 We
an efficient garbage burning plant.
Hook. according to the evidence.wss
10 pay Howard Franz then secre-
tary of the Board of Health, $500
in the event OF the acceptance by
the CITY OF the Davis plant. DR..
Frantz. Il was shown by the testi-
mony. was cooperating with his
son. The money was supposed 10
be used to some extent In getting
. The "inhuence" OF members OF
Council and the Board OF Health in
favor OF the Davis plant, testim ony
alleged. The money however. was
never paid by Hook to Howard
: Frsntz. .
The Frantzes were recommended
10 the mercy OF the court by the
Jury which tried the case, which
- vas an essential IN their escaping
jail terms.
Judge Harrington dissented from
: The decision OF Chet Justice Penne-
will and Judge Rec in not impos-
ing prison sentences on the Frantzes.
: lie expressed the opinion that The
fact that neither the City lost nor
The defendants gtined by their IN
lawful act does nd affect the enorm-
ity OF the crime"
Chief Justice. in the majority
opinion. admonished the Frantzes.
Your offense was a serious one de-
signed to corrupt public officials and
obstruct the legd and orderly pro-
vesses OF city government. Forum
ately your attempt was not consum- {
mated. Your offense was in the
attempt and no. in its accomplish /
ment."
The comments OF Chief Justice /
Pennewill in imposing sentence fol- /
low:
speaking fist 10 Abram E.
Frantz and Howard r. Frantz:
The jury fond you guilty OF the
offense for which you were indict-
cd. and accompanied their verdict
with a reconm endaton OF mercy.
We have no ioubt the jury meant
by such Recommendation that the
court would make the sentence as
light as might be consistent with
YOUR offnse, md that term OF i'm
prisonnen would not be imposed
unless the colrt felt il could not be
avoided We have reason TO be
lieve that the jury would not have
agreed upona verdict at all with
out such Recommendation OF mercy,
and are disposed 10 give il some
.onsideratioL
But your offense was serious
one. designed to corrupt public Of
fcials and o,struct the legal and or
Derby processes Of city government.
Fortunately your attempt was not
80 "a 90 c6OWn
no member OF the Board OF Health
or OF the CITY Council received any {
hribe. the ciy sustained no loss. and b
YOU received no gain. Your offense
was in the attempt and not in It's
accomplishnent. j
After n careful consideration OF
the senteno the Court have con-
GUIDED thu n no imprisonment is ,
in1poqed. tn, three defendants should
nav very sibsta ntial fines. amount
ing in the aggregate 10 $4,000.
This. Sc far as We know, is the
first convition Of any one for at ]
tempting q bride a city official, and ,
we think tie sentence to be imposed d.,
will be sufficient TO deter others
from making a like attempt.
I'VE believe the punishment Of i,
Henry r. Hook. one OF the defend a.,
ants Should be lighter than that i'm
posed IN the other two. While he
was juit as guilty as the other two
in the foundation OF the conspiracy, =
he trdd 10 undo the wrong by re-
pudiatlnc the unlawful agreement
entered into And. besides. he CON
tossed his guilt. and gave testimony =
for the State without which the con-
.piracy could probably not have been j
proved and conviction secured.
The sentence OF the Court is that
YOU. Abram Z. Frantz pay fine OF J
$4,000 and in addition thereto you ]
pay two-thirds of the costs OF prose- .
cution. The sentence of the Court is q
that you. Howard r. Frantz. pay C
fine of $4,000 and one-third OF the
costs Of prosecution. The sentence p
OF the Court Is that you. Henry r. T
Hook. pay a fine of $1,000"
In dissenting to the sentence. 5
Judge Harrington said: 7
I regret that I am unable n
agree with the majority OF the ii
court as to the sentence imposs ID on q
she defendants. Howard r. Frantz Il
and also Abram +. Frantz and feel r
that my duty to myself compels me C
10 state my position.
Both OF these defendants are g
men OF education, occupying a GER C
tain position in this community; vet s
they have been convicted of a crime n
Of a serious public nautre. involv- o
ing an unlawful agreement to at a
tempt to Improperly influence pub h
lie officials in the performance OF q
their duties. II
entered into. Howard Il. Frantz was I
the secretary Of one of the city o
boards involved. The fact that n
neither the city lost nor the defend p
ants gained by their unlawful act
does not in my judgment affect the u
enormity of the crime. While the q,
recomm endation Of the jury that ,
mercy be shown chem should be II
given all proper consideration. the p
final responsibility as 20 the char Z
ag.er of the s.. tercn rests with tho u
court. y,
Under the circumsts n"es invoiv- i
cd. I feel that fines alone are not
adequate punishment. but that Jail u
sentences as well as reasonable ~
lines should be imposed" II
The court announced several days u
ago that sentence would be imposed %
in the case at $50 o'clock yesterday u
a fternoon. Promptly at that time
the judges opened court. Hook and N
his attorneys, David J. Reinhardt u