The New York herald., 1922-03-12
JUSTICE MAY ERRS,
SAYS PROSECUTOR
Judges Stand in Kenneally
Case Amazing to Deputy
Acknowledgement.
BRIBE STORY DISCLOSED
Blickman Said to Have Testi-
fled to Taking Luncheon
With Indicted Man.

Justice Mitchell Mays statement that
the indictment OF William p. Kenneally
Tammany leader and friend of Charles
+. Murphy, was ridiculous" on the
ground that the testimony was insuffi-
cient. provoked a reply yesterday from
Stanley L. Richter, Deputy Attorney
General, who presented the case to the
Grand Jury.
Mr.. Richter is son-in-law of Samuel
Untermyer, counsel for the Lockwood
committe, which exposed the building
scandal a year ago, and got Kenneally
indicted on the charge of Saul Blick-
man, a builder, that Kenneally extorted
Sc. 600 from him to call off a strike.
Blickman now denies Kenneally was the
man.
Judges Stand Amazing"
Mr.. Richter's statement follows:
II was amazed on reading this morn
ing that Justice Mitchell May had stated
that it was ridiculous that the Ken
neatly indictment should have been
as insufficient to justify the finding of
an indictment. Apart from the mani
fest improperly Of the expression of
such an opinion by Justice of the SUI
preme Court with reference to an in
dictment found by a Grand Jury i'm
paneled before Justice Of the Supreme
Court In another county, 1t is apparent
to me at least that Mr.. Justice May is
ignorant either of the law or Of the
facts, or Of both the law and the facts.
"Mr. Justice May is reported to have
stated that Blickman testified before
the Grand Jury that he had seen Ken
neatly only once and that he would be
unable to identify him II he should be
confronted with him. Since Mr.. Justice
May has not had access to the minutes
of the Grand Jury 1t is Of course diff
ficult for me to conceive upon what he
bases such an assertion.
FIFTY-EIGHT machine FrIFTY-EIGHT
AHMKAlNt6IEflt tNuDs01%eoeNAhNyoE Il
so far as / have been informed, the
only information which Mr.. Justice
May had upon the subject of Blickman's
testimony must have come to him either
from Blickman or from the affidavit
which he advised Blickman to sign. The
affidavit specifically states that Blick-
man could. If the opportunity were pre-
sented to him, identify the man to whom
he had given the money.
While I am not permitted to dis
close what the testimony before the
Grand Jury was 1 deem it proper to
state that Blickman testified that not
only had he given 5000 to Kenneally,
Kenneally and had spent at least an
hour in Kenneally's company. AS a
matter Of interest I might state that
1 have been informed by Major Flood.
the detective who apprehended Ken
neatly under the bench warrant OF the
court, issued upon the Indictment, that
ne found Kenneally taking luncheon al
the same place where he and Blickman
had lunched.
"No Reference to Prosecutor"
IT read Mr.. Justice Mays interview
quite carefully in the hope that might
find therein a statement that he had
advised Blickman to communicate his
alleged mistake to the Attorney General
or to the Attorney Generals representa-
tive-which advice 1t was clearly his
duty, as Justice of the Supreme Cour,
and trusted with the due administration
of the law, to have given Blickman
While I was not surprised to find such
statement from Mr.. Justice May lack
ing. still think that its absence is most
significant.
with reference to the alleged inter-
view by Mr.. A. /. Nova, the personal
counsel for Mr.. John II. McCooey, the
Democratic leader of Kings county.
not much need be said. 1t appears to
me that Mr.. Nova has been rather reck-
less and presumptuous in pretending
to give information to the press as to
the testimony which was adduced be-
fore the Grand Jury.
"In the first place, II Is manifest that
Mr. Nova could not know what that
testimony was. AS I have already
stated, / am not at liberty to disclose
the testimony, but have no hesitation
in stating that IL Mr.. Nova made the
statement attributed TO him. his state
ments were not only false but must
have been known to him to be false"