New Britain herald., 1927-08-04
NEW BRITAIN DAILY HERALD, THURSDAY, AUGUST 1927

might well in the end end doubt the
correctness of any conclusion that
l. or in fact any other one man.
might reach.
Advisory Committee Chosen
Il believe that / could best re-
assure these honest doubters by hav-
ing a committee conduct an inves-
tigation entirely independent of my
own, their report to be made to me
and to be of help in reaching cor
rect conclusions. I felt that II after
such a committee had conducted its
investigation independently. we were
not in substantial agreement. then
the course of Massachusetts justice
did not flow in as clear a channel
as l believe 1t should. The final de-
cision and responsibility was, of
course, mine. For this committee
desired men who were not only well
and favorably known for their
achievements in their own lines. but
men whose regulations for intelli-
gence, -mindedness. intellectual
honesty and good Judgment were
above reproach.
Il asked to serve on that commit
tee President Abbott Lawrence Low
ell of Harvard University, former
Judge Robert Grant, and President
Samuel w. Stratton of Massachu-
sets Institute of Technology. No
one of them hesitated when asked
to serve. They began work as soon
as their affairs could be arranged,
labored continuously drought much
of June and through July, holding
their sessions independently, and ar
rived unanimously at a conclusion
which is wholly in accord with mine.
The public owes these gentlemen its
gratitude for their high minded, I'M
selfish service on this disagreeable
and extremely important problem.
Court Proceedings
1.-THE court proceedings in this
case may be divided into two parts:
First, the trial before the jury with
Judge Thayer presiding: second.
the hearings on the succession of
motions for new trial which were
addressed to the judge and passed
upon by him. Ali those proceedings
have been attacked by some of the
friends Of the accused men and their
cousel.
Two Forms In Attack
The attacks on the jury trial
take two forms: First, 1t is asserted
that the men are innocent and that
there was not sufficient evidence be-
fore the jury to Justify a finding of
guilty; second. 1t is asserted that
the trial itself was unfair. The at
tacks on the proceedings and on the
motions for a new trial are in sub
stance that the judge was biased
and unable to give the motions fair
and impartial consideration.
Was Trial Fair
THE inquiry that I have conduct
ed has had to do with the following
questions: Was the jury trial fair?
We're the accused entitled to new
trial? Are they guilty or not guilty?
LAS the first question complaint
has been made that the defendants
We're prosecuted and convicted be-
cause they were anarchists. As mat
ter of fact the issue of anarchy was
brought in by them as an explana-
ton of their suspicious conduct.
Their counsel against the advice of
Judge Thayer. decided to attribute
their actions and conduct to the fact
that they We're anarchists, suggest
ing that they were armed to protect
themselves, that they were about TO
start out, at 10 o'clock at night, to
collect radical literature, and that
the reason they lied was to save
their friends.
II have consulted with every
member OF the jury now alive.
eleven in number. They considered
the judge fair: that he gave them no
indication of his own opinion of the
case. Affidavits have been presented
claiming that the judge was preju-
diced. l see no evidence of prejudice
in his conduct Of the trial. That he
had an opinion as to the guilt or
innocence of the accused after hear
ing the evidence is natural and IN
cNita Bile.
THE allegation has been made
that conditions in the court room
were prejudicial to the accused.
After careful inquiry of the jury and
others, I find no evidence to support
this allegation. find the jurors were