Evening star., 1949-04-20
LaughIin-bowie
TiffContinueson
Gambling Probe
Question Of Arrestine
Lowyerin District
Still Unanswered
BULLETIN

ton lawyer, today filed in District
Court here a $208,500 damage
suit against States Attorney A.
Gwynn Bowie of Prince Georges
County. The suit charged MIR.
Bowie with malicious prosecu-
ton, willful abuse of process and
making slanderous statements
against MIR. Laughlin in con-
nection with the Washington
attorneys failure to answer a
county grand jury summons in
a gambling investigation.
James J. Laughlin, Washington
lawyer, and States Attorney A
Gwynn Bowie of Prince George
County. defied each other toda,
as both refused to give grount
on an attempt to serve an orde,
for Mr.. Laughlin's arrest for fail.
ure to answer q grand jury sum.
mons in the county gambling in
vestigation.
The immediate question seemed
to be whether the order issuee
by Judge Charles c. Marbury II
Prince Georges County Circui
Court yesterday could be served
on Mr.. Laughlin in the District.
Contending that this could moi
be done legally and that the orig.
inal subpoenas for his appearance
before the jury had been with
drawn. Mr.. Laughlin accused Mr.
Bowie of attempting to "smeal
and intimidate" him.
Bowie Issues Challenge.
Mr.. Bowie indicated that county
officials have not decided whether
they could move against the
Washington attorney in the
District. But he challenged Mr.
Laughlin to come out to the
county and make his charges tt
the court"
He denied charges made against
him in a three page statement
issued yesterday by Mr.. Laughlir
relative to the fracas in Prince
Georges County"
The "fracas" grew out Of Mr.
Laughlin's failure to appea,
Monday before the county grant
jury investigating gambling. H,
appeared voluntarily a week ag,
and later received subpoena
to produce various letters he salt
he had about gambling activitie
In the county. Later he wrote tn,
grand jury foreman that he re-
garded the letters as privileged.
Immunity Claimed.
His, statement yesterday con.
tended not only that the letter.
were privileged, but also that hi
was immune from process anc
that the ysubpoenas were no longer
in effect.
II always have regard for prop.
er process Of the courts" Mr.
Laughlin stated, "but. In this in
stance it is plain that Mr.. Bowie
is resorting to the old trick of {
defense counsel when he finds tn,
going tough to attempt to smeal
or intimidate the prosecutor.
The statement asserted, more
over, that Mr.. Bowie tried to per.
suade him not to testify befor,
the grand jury.
Angry Retort From Bowie.
Mr.. Laughlin's further assertion
that Mr.. Bowie in the gambling
investigation seemed to be "givins
aid and comfort to the gambling
fraternity in Prince Georges Coun.
ty which has flourished so vel
under his administration" brought
this angry retort from Mr.. Bowie
last night:
THE only mistake I made wa.
to talk to Laughlin privately where
the world would not know what
was being said. The record vii
show that I initiated the whole
gambling investigation and have
made every effort to follow
through. There is absolutely ne
truth in his statements"
Mr.. Bowie declared today hi
was not disturbed by Mr.. Laugh.
Inns ridiculous statements" bu,
that he might call the Washington
attorney to account for any fur.
ther serious charges rejecting or
his official conduct.
THE facts In this situation arr
so obvious that they give the lii
to what Mr.. Laughlin said abou
me in his statement" Mr.. Bowie
said. "I made strenuous and re-
peated efforts to get him to appear
before the grand jury and have
worked continuously in support o.
this gambling Investigation"
Jury In Session Again.
Mr.. Laughlin indicated today
there might be further develop.
ments in the controversy, al.
though he said he has not heard
from county officials and has NJ
intention of accepting service o1
the arrest order.
Meanwhile. the county Crane
fury, which has been meeting fol-
three weeks, was in session agair
today, presumably to continue the
gambling investigation 1t began
q week ago.
Mr.. Laughlin entered into the
picture as a result of statements
he made during a District Court
divorce trial here. Representing
Mrs. Anna T. Keleher in a divorc,
action against John B. Keleher
Mr.. Laughlin declared Kelehel
had conducted gambling opera.
tions in Mount Rainier, just ovel
the District line. Later he ant
Mrs. Keleher were invited by Mr.
Bowie to appear before the CRANE
jury. 1
In connection with the drive O
United States Attorney Georg,