St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1895-01-01

pOI Uul WC dIC thoo
the committee was indisposed to have
the matter thoroughly ventilated in
order to discover whether there was
anything in it diseredi.able 10 the SUI
perntendent Their thoroughness
broke at that point. They stumbled
just at the completion of their work.
The chairman of the committee will not
dare to deny that it is policy Il have
used that word advisedly: he will recog--
niZe what I refer toy that controlled
him in his handling of Mr.. ByrneS and
not a desire To act in view of all the
possible or aScertainable facts in Mi.
Byrnes' case.
snow the Presumption Is
on the side of The superintendent's be-
ing as criminal as any other member of
the force, so that the heSitency to handle
him as Williams was handled could not
proceed from any prior conviction of his
innocence. Wherever they have stuck
IN their fork they have found rot; and
whether Byrnes be rotten or not. he has
been in rot for thrty-one years, and
has been the executive head of rot for
the last two years. The presumption,
therefore, was against him, so that the
indispOston to handle him thoroughly
must have been grounded In some other
consideration than that of his preSum-
able innocence.
"There are two ways in which MIR.
BYrnes has put the committee under
obligations, and to degree destroyed
their independence. He put them under
obligations by cOnseDting to help defeat
Tammany Hall. and it Is to be remem-
bered that this committee is first and
foremost an antiTammany committee
and came down here for anti-Tammany
purposes. We are not saving that 1t
was stipulated that if we would secure
an honest election it should be remem-
bered in his behalf, but in the very
nature of the case favorS have to be re-
ciDrOcated. We are not going 20 dis
parage MI. Byrnes' good offices at cleo
ton; only it is to be remembered that
he did nothing more than he ought to
have done without being asked do,
and nothing more than he had the same
opportunity to do in previous elections
if he had only had the official courage
to use his authority.
The second way IN which the COM
mittee put themselves under obliga-
tiOnS 10 him was by taking him into
their confidence and allowing him to be-
come confederate with them in break
ing down the force. To the degree in
which they obtained help from Mr..
Byrnes they put themselves practically
uIder
Obligations to Protect Him.
NOW, | know the language Byrnes
used touching precisely this point, and
when heard 1t | knew everything was
up so far as square investigation OF
him was concerned. This acceptance OF
it had moItgaged the committee 10 that
extent, and one peculiarly Of mOrts
gage is that it has to be paid off or fore
closed. In this connection 1t ought to be
stated that Mi. Moss declares that he
never knew OF suspected that Mr.
Byrnes was furnishing information to
the committee or to counsel, and that it
was well known that he would not sane
ton such action.
"Mr. Byrnes has repeatedly attempt
ed to play The same game with the So
ciety for the Prevention of Crime. but
we nave refused to ally ourselves with
a man whom we believe to be more than
any one man responsible for the con-
ditiOn of the department. Ii we had
consented to do what the investigating
committee and its counsel have done,
we should thereby have surrendered
our point OF vantage, sacrificed our
would never have been heard of. We
are not charging the committee or its
counsel with a dishonest Intent, but
they blundered, and they blundered
badly. Mr.. ByrneS, as component ele-
ment of the department, was to that de-
gree defendant. By being taken into
the confidence of the prosecution, he
would himself 20 cut of the box and
onto the bench, where he could kick out
against the very men who were no
more the subject of indictment than he
was.
1--WE are not saying that there was
any understanding, or at least any
written stipulation. that if he would tell
what he knew about other men in the
department that were criminals he
should not be called 10 the witness
stand, or if called should be allowed TO
use the stand as hlStrlonIc opportunity
for eliminating his official associates
and celebrating his own personal and
official innocence. But whether there
was any such stipulation or not, the ac-
ceptance of his assistance practically
involved the deal; and committee
that G. me down from Albany with the
express purpose of investigating deals
ought to have been punctlliously care
full to avoid even the appearance of hav
ing susceptible side for the very sort
of offense they were designated to de-
tect and adiudge."
After complaining of the disinclina
ton of the LeXOW committee to consult
with their committee, the statement
continues: I'VE, of the executive COM
mittee, feel that our fight during the
past three years has been pre-eminently
a contest with Mr.. Byrnes. He has
known perfectly we'll that our only in
tentiOn has been to secure the enforce
ment of law in this city, and yet he has
dogged our steps from first to last, and
he omitted no efforts 10 discredit us in
the estimation of the community. If
the executive element of tile police de-
partment had been able to accclEp pliSh
It's purpose it would have
Crushed the Society
for the Prevention of Crime. there
would have been no LeXow committee,
and Grant would have been mayor
today instead of Strong.
"When our agents were making 1t
uncomfortable foe their associates. MIR
Byrnes represented to the police JUS
tices. so the press informs us, that the
issuing of warrants to irresponsible
parties ought to be stopped. We raised
no question as to the wisdom OF the rule
proposed by Supt. Byrnes in this par
ticular: we are only calling attention to
the fact that it was he who ruled in the
matter, and that the immediate effects Of
the rule so adopted would be to retard
the operations of our detectives. We un-
derstood and the community understood
that that was the object which Mr..
Byrnes had in view. Mr.. ByrneS struck
at our society in the arrest OF our chief
detective, Gardner. l am not raising
any question here as to Mr.. Gardner's
guilt or innocence, but am only saying
that the police department conspired
with phenomenal unanimity to rid Itself
of the embarrassment which our de-
tective occasiOHed them. Byrnes hated
and kept tab on us, and tried to make
us contemptible In public esteem by
showing that our agent was levying
blsckmail. which, as shown by the LexoW
committee, was precisely what his
agents were doing, and what we are
Obliged to presume he knew his agents
we're doing.
"Withlh three days of the above at
tack he struck our society another blow