Page:The Green Bag (1889–1914), Volume 17.pdf/86

 THE LEGAL SIDE OF JOSEPH W. FOLK "We have, Mr. Folk," was the reply. "You don't know anything about boodling?" "Not a word." "Nor about a Combine?" "Nothing." "You know nothing about $250,000 for the Central Traction bill; $47,500 for the City Lighting bill; $75,000 for the Subur ban deal, and various sums for other bills." "Not a word." "Boys, I am absolutely ashamed of you." He touched a button. An office attaché entered. "Ask John to step in," said Folk. From an ante-room John K. Murrell entered. If a bomb had burst under the feet of the brother and of Robertson, it could not have paralyzed them more. For a few minutes neither could say a word and then they broke down completely and sobbed out a full confession. They were taken before the Grand Jury with John K. Murrell and told everything. So much for the methods of the man in investigating these matters. In others he is just as thorough and just as certain. Not one of those early indictments based on a common sense understanding of the case, has been held defective by the Supreme Court. In not a single instance has he made an error in the trial of the cases which the Supreme Court found reversible. All of the cases remanded went back because of erroneous instructions of the court, or in some cases on technical points in which the Supreme Court has reversed former rulings. The frequency of these reversals roused the public to believe that the polit ical standing of the defendants influenced the decisions, but in all these cases the error of the court below was clearly shown. These set-backs did not deter Folk in the least. He returned to the conflict, and reversals were but followed by second con victions, and so closely did he adhere to the rules laid down by the Supreme Court

73

that in these second trials not a loophole has been discovered. Folk's one plan in the prosecution hag been to keep the issue clear before the jury. He has not allowed opposing counsel to con found the issues and thus confuse the jury, and when the matter was left with the twelve triers, they went to the jury rooms in every instance with the State's case and charges clearly before them. His addresses have been in the nature of appeals and some of them are fit to adorn the text-books of schools. He has pointed out to juries the awful results which would follow an acquit tal and the high moral effect of a conviction, and the Supreme Court has held that this was proper. In all the prosecutions Folk has met the very best of Missouri's legal talent and not once has he been worsted. Probably the hardest fought of all the cases were those in which Emil Meysenburg, Edward Butler and Robert M. Snyder were the defendants. Folk might have had clearer cases if he could have secured Charles Kratz as a witness. But Kratz re fused to come and Folk was compelled to make trips to Washington, D. C., secure the cooperation of President Roosevelt, Secre tary Hay, and others, and through them to force a new treaty with Mexico which included a clause for extradition for the crime of bribery. And his knowledge of law brought others to his view that the new treaty was retroactive, and thus he obtained Kratz. But he found a stubborn character when he did get him, and to this day Kratz has done no more than to say "Good day" to the Circuit Attorney. The Meysenburg case, as the first of the big ones to be tried, attracted more than usual attention. He was defended by Judge Chester H. Krum, Judge Priest, Judge Boyle, and Messrs. Lehmann and Jourdan. The State charged that Meysenburg held certain shares of stock in the St. Louis Electric Construction Company, a defunct corporation which gave way to a concern engineered by the very men who were back of the Suburban bill