Evening star., 1953-10-16
Virqinio Tax BombsheII

If ever there was a case in which judgment
should be suspended, it is the case of the indict-
ment on tax evasion charges of Sidney S.
Kellam, campaign manager for the Democratic
candidate for Governor of Virginia. For there
may be more in this matter than meets the eye.
The indictment, coming almost on the eve
of the election, is a blow to Democratic Candi-
date Thomas B. Stanley. He already had
stiff fight on his hands because, for the first
time in many years, Republican gubernatorial
candidate, State Senator Ted Dalton is making
serious, bid. And the indictment of his own
campaign manager might we'll make things
even more difficult for Mr.. Stanley.
There are certain aspects of this matter,
however, which should be kept in mind. One
Is that it is Mr.. Kellam and not Mr. Stanley
who has been indicted. Another is that Mr..
Kellam and those indicted with him will have
no possible chance to clear themselves before
the election. They may be innocent or they
may be guilty. But that is something which
cannot be established prior to the election, and
this being So the fact that an indictment has
been returned should not influence the voting
Then there are some other rather curious
circumstances which should be remembered.
This is an old case in which decision against
criminal prosecution was made some three years
ago. In that connection the grand jury, in ad-
dition to returning the indictment, also re-
turned report. And this report said in part:
Criminal prosecution seemingly had been
evaded by the payment of large sum of money.
If true, the ramifcationS, potentialities and
possible repercusSionS could be far-reaching
throughout the State"
This is an amazing statement for grand
jury to make to court What does it mean?
Was criminal prosecution evaded three years
ago by bribing some one? If So who was
bribed and who was the briber? If the grand
jury had evidence of bribery, why did it not
return bribery indictment? If the reference
is not to bribery, why did the grand jury offer,
and the court receive, such cryptic and Sug-
geStive statement just a few days in advance
of an election?
There is still another circumstance worth
noting. The indictment and report were re-
turned in the jurisdiction of L. Shields Parsons,
tr, newly appointed Republican United States
attorney. But Mr. Parsons says the grand jury
action was not initiated by him. He said that
group OF citizens approached him and asked
If they could present matter to the grand
jury. This message, Mr.. Parsons said, was given
to the grand jury which indicated an interest
and agreed to hear the group This may be the
usual practice in Richmond. But it certainly
would be unusual in Washington, where the
United States attorney normally exercises his
discretion, based on the evidence in presenting
or refusing to present case to a grand jury.
These circumstances, of course, do not bear
on the guilt or innocence of Mr.. Kellam, nor
do they establish whether there was any politi-
cal motivation behind the return of the in
dlctment and the report. They are sufficient,
however, to support a contention that the
Virginia voters should rest their decision next
month Squarely on their appraisal of the merits
of the candidates, and not upon the rather
startling and novel diversion presented by the
action of this grand jury