The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1932-04-28
The ROlph bud

There is no evidence that Tom Mooney Warren
Billings set off bomb in San Francisco back on July
o. 1916 but Governor James Roph certainly dropped
pretty sad dud in his decision the Mooney pardon
appeal.
He says that he and his associates approached the
problem MONEYS guilt lin spirit of absolute fair
ness and without any bias or prejudice of any kind
against Thomas j. Mooney"
Yet this flagrantly is beled by the nature of the
Governors statement Even his summation is COM
posed in large part of allegations relative to MONEYS
economic and political views, most of which are not
supported by the facts. He admits that his case is
based mainly on "the past life of Mooney career
admittedly not engaging to the public utilities of
California.
Governor Rolph seems not to have learned
elementary consideration of logic and jurisprudence
namely that reeraton of charges does not constitute
proof of guilt For example, in his points alleged to
"cinch" MONEYS guilt Roph states
Mooney and Billings entered into a conspiracy
to terrify the citizens by exploding a bomb.
Billings, tool and agent of Mooney, carried
bomb in a suitcase first to 121 Market street about
100 p. M, July %, 1916 and then to Stewart and
Market Streets scene of the explosion where he
acted in concert with Mooney"
It is almost an insult to any familiar with the
case to repeat more than there is not an ota
of credible evidence in existence to support either of
these statements.
Rolph contends that Mooney has not presented
any facts in support of his petition which have not
been presented hitherto to the courts and to the three
preceding governors of California
This is substantially true though Governors steph-
ems and Richardson did not have the benefit of Mac
Donalds final reputation and the complete reopenng
of the case in the summer of 1880. But the plain
fact that Mooney did not need to present any new
facts in substantiation of his plea for pardon.
The complete collapse of the case against him
all that necessary. 1t was up to the prosecution
rather than Mooney to present facts if Mooney
Justly is to be kept in prison.
The facts that the California courts and governors
have examined this evidence and have failed to free
Mooney and Billings is one of the most incredible
reflections upon conceptions OF justice and 1alr play
in all the record of history.
Governor Roph blandly asserts that he is con-
WINGED that Mooney convicted justly by the jury
bv whom he was tried" Others in position to judge
of the matter with technical competence have not
shared this view.
Judge Franklin Griffin in whose court Mooney
tried had some mild misgivings as to how Justly
Mooney was convicted He has said: THE Mooney
case is one of the drtiest jobs put over and
resent the fact that my court was used for such
contemplate piece of work Every witness who
testified against Mooney mas Deen SHOWn py 1dCS anu
circumstances developed since his trial, and which
are incontrovertible, to have testified falsely.
There is now no evidence against him; there is
not a serious suggestion that any exists"
President wilson's mediation commission early i'll
1918 declared unequvocay that "the verdict against
Mooney was discredited" by the proof of the Oxmah
perjury.
John B. Densmore, drector-ge general of employment
in the United States department of labor conducted
another ofacial federal investigation and concluded
that: Since the Oman exposure the district attor-
neys case has melted steadily away until there is
little left but an unsavory record of manipulation
and perjury"
The jurors in Moneys case were in fair position