Copyright
United States. Congress. House. Committee on the J.

Charges against H. Snowden Marshall online

. (page 1 of 3)
Online LibraryUnited States. Congress. House. Committee on the JCharges against H. Snowden Marshall → online text (page 1 of 3)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook


1^^




3:!!Ki!i;i:!S|;



CHARGES AGAINST H. SNOWDEN MARSHALL



REPORT

OF THE

SUBCOMMITTEE TO THE
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

•' * HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SIXTY-FOURTH CONGRESS
First Session

IN THE MATTER OF

CHARGES AGAINST H. SNOWDEN MARSHALL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT ATTORNEY

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT

OF NEW YORK




WASHINGTON

fJOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

1916



6*^



D. of D.
AUG 7 1916



K

i-

I

OHAEGES AGAINST H. SNOWDEN MARSHALL.



To the Committee on the Judiciary of the House of Representatives:

Your subcommittee, appointed on the 1st day of February, 1916,
to investigate the charges made by Representative Frank Buchanan
against H. Snowden Marshall, United States district attorney for the
southern district of >ew York, on the 19th day of June, 1916, filed a
confidential report and with it the printed record containing the
testimony and all exhibits fded. The report was referred back to
the subcommittee as it was understood at the time that further
testimony would be taken by the full committee. This testimony,
for reasons which are fuUy understood, has not been taken, and as
your subcommittee desires that there should be no further delay in
the consideration of the case, begs leave to report as foUows:

That it is impossible to ascertain the truth of the charges made
which relate to the indictment of Representative Buchanan, and the
indictment of Rae Tanzer, without a view of the minutes of the
grand juries in these cases, and as these minutes have been denied to
your subcommittee we feel that it is for you to determine as to the
desirability of obtaining them. Should you decide to adopt the
necessary legal proceedings in order to procure the minutes in ques-
tion, we will be glad to give full consideration to the testimony as
disclosed by them, and to submit our views upon the same; but if it
should be decided not to procure the said minutes, but to determine
the case upon the testimony already taken, in our judgment there is
only one course that should be pursued, and that is to recommend
to the House of Representatives that no further proceedings be had
under H. Res. No. 90.
Respectfully submitted.

C. C. Carlin,
Warren Gard,
(Reserving the right to file herewith separate views.)

John M. inelson,
(Same reservation.)



SEPARATE VIEWS OF HON. WAREEN GARD.



In re the impeachment of H. Snowden Marshall, district attorney
for the Southern District of New York. — Separate report of Mr.
Gard, of subcommittee from the Committee on the Judiciary.

On January 12, 1916, Frank Buchanan, a Representative in Con-
gress from the State of Illinois, arose and presented in the House of
Representatives amended and completed charges of impeachment
against H. Snowden Marshall, United States district attorney for the
Southern District of New York, impeaching him of high crimes and
misdemeanors.

Representative Buchanan had before, to wit, on December 14, 1915,
presented certain charges of impeachment against said H. Snowden
Marshall as said district attorney.

The amended and completed charges were 40 in number, and the
subcommittee to which was referred these charges for investigation,
for its convenience of consideration and also for the proper separation
of evidence thereon, divided the charges into groups, as follows:

Group A, consisting of charges 1, 2, 3, and 4, which we designate as "conspiracies
with persons and corporations."

GrouTp B, consisting of charges 5, 6, 7, 8, 13, 14, 15, 23, and 24, matters relating to
improper procuring of indictments.

Group C, consisting of charges 9, 10, 11, and 12, relating to the shipment of war
munitions and conspiracies with foreign governments.

Group D, consisting of charge 16, the unlawful use of public funds in labor matters.

Group E, consisting of charges 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, attempting to improperly
influence and improperly procure United States judges for the southern district of
New York.

Group F, consisting of charges 25, 26, 27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 37, which relate to
the cases of Rae Tanzer and others.

Group G, consisting of charges 28, 34, 35, 36, 38, 39, and 40, which we designate as
relating to his personal unfitness to hold the office of the United States district at-
torney.

The subcommittee held its sessions in the city of Washington and
in the city of New York and examined 76 persons as witnesses, some
of whom were recalled and some of whom furnished additional
statements and exhibits after testifying.

The evidence adduced will be commented upon under the fore-
going grouping of charges, viz:

Group A.

1. I charge him with having conspired with persons, firms, and corporations, their
agents and servants, to grant such persons, firms, and corporations the privilege of
violating various criminal, neutrality, interstate commerce, or custom laws of the
United States in the southern district of New York.

2. I charge him with securing for persons or corporations great financial profit in
consequence of the violation of the United States laws.

3. I charge him with corruptly and collusively participating in such conspiracies.

4. I charge him with corruptly neglecting and refusing to prosecute gross and
notorious violations of various criminal, neutrality, custom revenue, and antitrust
laws of the United States within said judicial district.

5



6 CHAEGES AGAINST H. SNOWDEN MARSHALL.

The only evidence whicli was presented upon the four charges
embodied in group A was certain evidence affecting transactions of
importation of Julius Strauss and one Rosenthal at the port of New
York, and after full consideration thereof I am unable to find any
evidence which either actually or constructively associates H.
Snowden Marshall as district attorney for the southern district of
New York -with any wrongdoing in connection therewith, and there-
fore it is my opinion that no evidence has been produced against
said H. Snowden Marshall which would authorize his impeachment
upon the charges in said group A.

Group B.

5. I charge him with corruptly inducing and procuring grand juries to return into
the district coiut for the southern district of New York indictments charging crimes
without there being evidence before said graiid jury which would in any degree justify
the finding and filing of such indictments.

6. I charge him with being guilty of oppression in corruptly procuring indictments
from the grand jury in said district charging reputable citizens with crime, although
there was no evidence before the grand jury which would in the least warrant such
charges.

7. I charge him with corruptly conspiring with other persons to spread broadcast
throughout the United States maliciously false newspaper publications and reports,
emanating as official statements and purporting to describe results of investigations
conducted by said United States attorney and his assistants, with the object of destroy-
ing friendly relations between the United States and one or more foreign Governments.

8. I charge him ^vith unlawfully and feloniously abusing the legal process before
the grand jury in said district of JSIew York, the Secret Service, and the Bureau of
Investigation and Inquiry of the Department of Justice in furtherance of such
conspiracy aforesaid.

13. I charge him with having corruptly used the powers of his office for the purpose
of slandering and libeling peaceable and law-abiding people to their great injury.

14. I charge laim with having abetted, approved, acquiesced, and permitted unlaw-
ful and oppressive misuse of subpoenas and other process before grand juries in said
southern district of New York.

15. I charge him with ha\'ing deprived law-abiding citizens of their legal rights,
privileges, and immunities.

23. I charge him with being a party to a conspiracy parti' ipatcd in by his assistant
district attorneys and other officials connected with the, ad ministration of justice in
the said southern district of New York, for the purpose of unlawfully manipulating
and controlling the selection of grand and petit jurors in connection with cases in the
courts of said district.

24. I charge him with ha\'ing been guilty of acts by which the rights of the United
States and that of individuals have been unlawfully prejudiced and the orderly and
fair administration of justice defeated or obstructed in one or more instances.

The evidence presented upon the charges assembled as group B
related to the proceedings in the office of the United States district
attorney for the southern district of New York during the incum-
bency of said H. Snowden Marshall as said United States district
attorney in the matter of procuring indictments against Repre-
sentative Buchanan and others, in the matter of procuring indict-
ments against Rae Tanzer, David Slade, Frank Safrord, and others,
and in the matter of procuring indictments against Herman Oppen-
heimer and Simon Kugel and others.

Your subcommittee having called before it United States District
Attorney Marshall in executive session, asked him if he would submit
without process for the consideration of the committee the minutes of
the grand jury which had returned the indictment against Buchanan
and others or whether he woidd prefer to have process of this com-
mittee issued therefor, and he advised the committee that he would



CHAEGES AGAIKST H. SNOWDEN MARSHALL. 7

prefer to communicate with the United States Attorney General,
which he did, and he later announced through his office and that of
the Attorney General of the United States that the Department of
Justice deemed said minutes of said grand jury to be privileged and
therefore decUned to submit them to the subcommittee for exami-
nation.

The subcommittee did not issue process to compel the production
of these grand jury minutes.

Thereupon the subcommittee called certain members of the grand
jury who testified and whose testimony is to the effect that this
grand jury first began the hearing of evidence against one Von Rin-
telin, who was at that time charged with having endeavored to fraud-
ulently procure a passport of the United States, and from the con-
sideration of that charge other matters developed which resulted in
the indictment of said Von Rintelin, Lamar, Monnett, Buchanan,
Fowler, Schultheiss, Martin, and others.

The subcommittee was diligent in seeking to ascertain whether or
not the indictment against Representative Buchanan had been re-
turned against him without evidence and because of proceedings
instigated by him upon the floor of the House of Representatives
against said H. Snowden Marshall as such United States district
attorney, and its inquiries developed from the examination of the
grand jurors that the name of Representative Buchanan was asso-
ciated in the evidence which it was considering as early as the latter
part of September, 1915, and that there had been other and additional
evidence offered to said grand jury against said Frank Buchanan
before December 14, 1915, the date upon which the first charges of
impeachment were made in the House of Representatives by said
Representative Buchanan against District Attorney Marshall.

The evidence of grand jurors, the evidence of vSpecial Agent Bie-
lasld from the Department of Justice of the United States, the evi-
dence of Assistant United States District Attorney Sarfaty, was to
the effect that before the indictment of Representative Buchanan
was returned, there had been evidence submitted to the grand jury
which associated said Frank Buchanan with the offense for which he
was later charged by indictment and which in their opinions justified
his indictment.

The subcommittee, of course, could not pass upon the weight or the
sufficiency of the evidence presented, but was called upon to deter-
mine only whether evidence had been presented against Representa-
tive Buchanan or whether the indictment had been returned solely
because within his privilege as a Member of the House of Representa-
tives he had preferred charges of impeachment against the district
attorney for the southern district of New York.

There was no evidence to show that said United States District
Attorney Marshall had caused said Representative Buchanan to be
indicted without evidence and because of his having made charges of
impeachment against said United States District Attorney Marshall
on December 14, 1915.

In the matter of the indictments of Rae Tanzer, David Slade, Frank
Safford, and others, the evidence discloses that one Rae Tanzer had
through her attorneys, Slade & Slade, brought a suit against one
James W. Osborne in the courts of New York County, charging seduc-



8 CHARGES AGAINST H. SJSTOWDEN MARSHALL.

tion and breach of promise of marriage, and that within a few days
after said petition had been filed in said New York Comity Court, said
Rae Tanzer was arrested upon- a charge of using the mails with intent
to defraud, this charge being based upon a letter she had written to
said James W. Osborne.

After being arraigned before United States Commissioner Hough-
ton, said Rae Tanzer was later indicated by a grand jury for the
southern district of New York, and in later indictments two of her
sisters were indicted, as were Frank Safford, a hotel clerk; David
Slade, counsel for Rae Tanzer, and other persons. These last-
mentioned matters may be properly associatecf with charges 25, 26,
27, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, and 37, as assembled in group F. It is suffi-
cient to say that it is exceedingly ciuestionable that the United
States commissioner for the southern district of New York and the
grand jury for the court in said district should have properly assumed
jurisdiction in any of these cases. More particular comment upon
this matter wdll be made under the consideration of group F.

The evidence submitted to us in the indictments against Herman
Oppenheimer, Simon Kugel, and other persons shows that these
named persons were indicted upon charges of unlawfully conceaUng
the assets of certain bankrupts and upon charges of conspiracy to
defeat justice in the trials and adjudications of bankrupt matters.

The evidence of Oppenheimer, Kugel, and a number of other per-
sons was taken, as was also the evidence of the clerk of the United
States court for the southern district of New York, and the evidence
of Samuel Hershenstein, an assistant United. States district attorney
who had charge of said causes, and while the testimony of witnesses
to some extent is in conflict, the consideration of the records of the
United States court, of the indictments themselves, and of the dif-
ferent pleas to said indictments filed by said defendants, shows that
there was no oppression or corrupt procuring of indictments against
these persons.

Group C.

9. I Charge him with having knowledge of the existence of circumstances from
which knowledge is imputed to him that large sums of money have been expended
for or on behalf of foreign Governments and of various purveyors and manufacturers
of war munitions for the purpose of influencing the actions of said United States
attorney in furtherance of a conspiracy.

10. I charge him with having corruptlv neglected or refused to prosecute men who
have made the port of New York, -within said judicial district, a military or naval
base for foreign belligerent powers.

11. I charge him \vith corruptly neglecting and refusing to prosecute violations of
Federal statutes prohibiting the loading and shipment of explosives on ships carrying
passengers within said judicial district.

12. I charge him with corruptly neglecting and refusing to prosecute violations of
the foreign-enlistment act and laws of the United States -within said district.

There was no evidence produced and none offered to be produced
before said subcommittee to substantiate the charges made under
said group C.

Group D.

16. I charge him with aiding, abetting, and appro-\ang unlawful expenditures of
public moneys in violation of the laws of the United States.

There was no evidence produced and none offered to be produced
to substantiate charge 16, which is herein denominated group D.



CHARGES AGAIXST H. SNOWDEN MARStlALL. 9

Group E.

17. I charge him with being guilty of attempts by private solicitation of influencing
the official actions and opinions of judges in the southern district of New York while
in the performance of their judicial duties.

18. I charge him with having used the powers of his office to cause and procure a
discrimination in the assignment of judges to conduct trials in said district, so as to
discriminate against one or more resident judges.

19. I charge him with having used the powers of his office to procure or assist in
the procurement of judges to be imported into the southern district of New York from
other districts for the trial of cases in said district by falsely representing the condition
of judicial business within said district.

20. I charge him with being guilty of private solicitation with intent to influence
the official acts and decisions of judges imported as aforesaid.

21. I charge him with having attempted to corruptly control decisions and official
actions of one or more of such imported judges.

22. I charge him with having procured the assignment of one or more imported
judges for the" conduct of trials in the said district for the purpose of preventing
defendants in such cases from receiving a fair and impartial trial at the hands of
resident judges.

The evidence received by the subcommittee upon the chargjes
assemble'd as group E fails to show any attempt of H. Snowden
Marshall to influence the official actions and opinions of judges in
the southern district of New York in the performance of their judicial
duties, or to procure a discrimination in the assignment of judges or
to discriminate against resident judges, or to procure judges to be
imported into the southern district of > ew York, or of private solici-
tation with intent to influence the official acts or decisions of judges,
or of having attempted to corruptly control their decisions and
official actions, or of having procured the assignment of certain
judges.

Group F.

25. I change him v.ith havirg employed the powers of his office for the purpose
of shielding and to pre\ ei t the exposure of unlawful and improper conduct of one
James W. Osborne in relation to facts involved in civil litigation which was pending
in the State court in the State of New York.

26. I charge him with unlawiuUv protecting said Osborne and others from prose-
cution for the violation of United States laws.

27. I charge him with willfullv and corruptly refusing and neglecting to prosecute
gross and notorious violations of the United States statutes committed by said James
W. Osborne and others in the city and State of New York within said district.

29. I charge him with having used the powers of his said office as United States
district attorney to corruptly and willfully defame, slander, and injure the good name
and professional standing of law-abiding citizens of the United States, to their great
injury, fo-r the purpose of protecting the private individual interests of James W.
Osborne.

30. I charge him with having corruptly failed, neglected, and refused to prosecute
persons who, while acting as witnesses for the United States in the trial of causes,
committed the crime of perjurv and conspiracy in connection with the cases of the
United States against Rae Tanzer, United States against Frank D. Saft'ord. and
United States against Albert L. McCullough et al.

31. I charge him with ha\dng used and employed the United States grand jury m
the southern district of New York for the purpose of attempting to establish records
which might be used in defense of James \\'. Osborne, H. Snowden Marshall. Roger B.
Wood, and Samuel H. Hershenstein (the last two being United States district attor-
neys under said H. Snowden Marshall), and not for the purpose of Investigation of
violations of the United States laws.

32. I charge him with corruptly and willfully failing to remove certain of his assist-
ant district attornevs who destroyed documentary evidence material in the trial of a
pending case in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New
York. . . J . . ,

33. I charge him with corruptly and maliciously causing to be instituted criminal
proceedings against Rae Tanzer and others for the purpose of protecting James "\\ .



10 CHARGES AGAINST H. SNOWDEN MARSHALL.

Osborne, a special United States district attorney and a personal intimate friend of
said H. Snowden Marshall.

37. I charge him with having corruptly and willfully withheld and failed to present
before the grand jury material and important evidence in connection with alleged
investigations instituted before said grand jury by said H. Snowden Marshall in
relation to the cases of United States against Rae Tanzer and United States against
Albert J. McCuUough et al., and others.

The evidence upon this assembled group of charges was presented
to us through the medium of the testimony of numerous witnesses
and court records as disclosing the facts and procedure in the cases
of the United States against Rae Tanzer, United States against
Frank D. Safford, United States against Albert J. McCuUough'et al.

Charges 26 and 27, alleging that said district attorney unlawfully
protected the said Osborne and others from prosecution for violation
of the United States laws, and with wiKully and corruptly refusing
and neglecting to prosecute gross and notorious violations of the
United States statutes committed by James W. Osborne and others
are not sustained by the evidence.

The evidence shows that Rae Tanzer was a resident of the county
of New York, living in the city of New York with her two sisters.

That she met a man in the city of New York who solicited acquain-
tance with her and who visited her at her home and accompanied her
to different places, tellmg her that his name was Oliver Osborne.

That Rae Tanzer and the man whom she knew as Oliver Osborne
together visited a hotel in Plainfield, N. J., registering as man and
wife, and that at least upon one other occasion they registered as man
and wife at a hotel in the city of New York, at each of said times and
places she having had sexual intercourse with said Osborne.

It is in evidence that Rae Tanzer later identified the man giving his
name to her as Oliver Osborne as James W. Osborne.

The evidence shows that after Rae Tanzer had been solicited to
return certain letters in her possession allegedly written by Oliver
Osborne, she consulted several attorneys, including Max Steurer, who
testified before this committee, the several attorneys first being con-
sulted by her refusing to act against James W. Osborne on account
of intimate professional or personal relations with him.

The testimony then is that Miss Tanzer visited the legal firm of
Slade & Slade and that after her call upon them, a petition was pre-
pared by said Slade & Slade in which Rae Tanzer was plaintiff and
James W. Osborne was defendant, asking damages in the sum of
S50,000 tlu-ough the court of > ew York County against said defendant
for seduction and breach of promise of marriage.

Within a very short time after this action was filed in the IS ew York
County court, James W. Osborne filed an affidavit before a United
States commissioner against Rae Tanzer charging her with using the
mails with intent to unlawfully defraud James W. Osborne.

Rae Tanzer was arrested by the authorities of the United States on
this charge, was placed in jail, afterwards given a hearing before
United States Commissioner Houghton, then bound over to appear
before the grand jury, and was later indicted by said grand jury.

Following the procedure against Rae Tanzer, indictments were
returned by the grand jury, for the southern district of New York
against Frank D. Safford, Albert J. McCullough, David Slade, and
other persons.



CHARGES AGAINST H, SNOWDEN MARSHALL. 11

The only one of these cases which was fully tried was the case
against Frank D. Safford, who was a clerk in the hotel at Plainficld at
which it was alleged James W. Oshorne and Rae Tanzcr registered as
man and wife, and who testified in identification of James W. Osborne,
the jury in that case having found said Frank SafFord guilty, which
conviction has only lately been reversed by the court of appeals for
manifest errors in the admission and rejection of evidence in the trial
court to the prejudice of the defendant.

The trial of Rae Tanzer on a charge of perjury has only recently


1 3

Online LibraryUnited States. Congress. House. Committee on the JCharges against H. Snowden Marshall → online text (page 1 of 3)