The Black Hills union. [volume] (Rapid City, Pennington County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1889-1904, 1904-02-05
RELEASED ON WRIT
OF HABEAS CORPUS
Mayor Carter Harrison Freed
by Action Of Judge TuthiII,
Of Responsibility.
HE is IN NO WAY GUILTY
Mayor Was Not Responsible for Burn
ing of Theater and for Loss of
576 Lives in the Disaster
of December 80.

Chicago, Jan. 29,-Mayor Carter II.
Harrison was released on a writ of
habeas corpus by Judge Richard S.
Tuthill, VINO said that the~nayor, IN his
opinion, could not be held legally in
connection with any responsibility for
the loss of 576 lives in the Iroquois the
alter fire of December 80.
The judge declared that the mayor
was in no way guilty or liable, and that
he coroner's jury, in ordering Mayor
Harrison held to the grand jury, had
put an unjust stigma on the mayor.
Mayor Harrison had been constructive
ly arrested on a mittimus issued by
Coroner Traeger. This warrant was
served on the mayor Tuesday.
Statement by the Mayor.
Following his release Mayor Harri-
son made the following statement to
the Associated Press:
THE only possible feature which the
jury was able to find connecting me
with the Iroquois fire disaster was the
alleged negligence and Incompetence
of my appointecs, Fire Chief Musham
and Building Inspector Williams. l
want to call attention to the fact that
Chief Musham mas been connected with
the Chicago fire department for forty
years, beginning at the bottom of the
ladder and winning his way to the po-
sition Of assistant chief ~ the gallant
and heroic conduct of a lifetime. Up
on the retirement of Chief Sweenie i
appointed Musham chief. The appoint
ment was strictly on merit, and met
with unanimous approval. When the
position of building commissioner be-
came vacant last summer ! invited the
Builders club, the Association OF Ar
chiteCtS and various other
professional organizations to nominate
the best available man for the vacancy
rNhaN naraaS in nominating MT. WILL
Jams, a republican, and gave me the
strongest testimonials to his character
and efficiency. l appointed him, n
he entered most earnestly mis- du-
ties. Both of these men were regarded
as ideal appointments. The imputatlon
of guilt upon these two men is entirely
uniustifable. but to strike at me over
their shoulders Is little short of IN
fanny"
Judge TuthilIs Opinion.
In delivering his opinion Judge Tithill
said:
Il have gone over the testimony OF
Fire Marshal Musham and Bulldlng
Commissioner Williams n the mayor
particularly, and l "a say without
qualification or hesitation that ! find
not one word in the evidence, so far as
I have examined it, which tends even
remotely, in my judgment, to snow
thai the mayor a any knowledge OF
this matter, or that he was in any re-
spect negligent of any duty imposed
upon him by the laws or by the rules
tina commonly apply to persons who
are responsible for the safety of others.
II find that he instituted through ms
Office AN investigation of the theaterS
Of Chicago. as las been stated, and that
a report was made from the commits
| sioner of buildings that there was none
OF the theaterS of Chicago that was aO-
srl,taly i, rnnDp1icyt ! With the law nor
the ordinances of the city, something
that is now well KNOWN.
Il find that an order was introduced
in the council under Alderman NoVaks
motion suspending the enforcement OF
the penalty attached TO the theaters
that were not complying with the or
dinances. pending all Investigation by
| the city council, and that this report
was sent in promptly by the mayor to
the city council. II that the city coun-
ell promptly referred it, as was proper
and orderly and in the usual course or
proceedings, to a committee or the
| council, the judiciary committee, and
| that committee, in the same proper and
orderly course of proceeding, referred
that report to a subcommittee, which
had the report printed for the informa-
| ton Of the council, for the information
of the people, and for the information
of the officials of the city in particular.
Not Negligent in Any Respect.
Now, in so acting. he was not negli-
| gent in any respect. He did his duty.
1t is not for the mayor to pass ordi-
nanceS, and it was not for him. simply
upon the report of the condition then
existing, as it appeared to him. 10 say
that during all the years that We're
passed, this ignoring of the provisions
of ordinances would justify him in
closing up the theaters. all the theaters.
because he report covered all or them.
1t would have been taking a respon-
sibility that would have brought uni
versal condemnation upon the city gov
ernment; it would AVE been said that
it was not necessary to be so harsh, so
| severe, that some discretion was al
lowed or would be allowed under the
circumstances to the city. and hence I
find that the mayor did any 9TH
err mayor would have done. The most
careful and cautious man that could
occupy the mayors chair conld not
have lone more than he did.
II find hat there were gross viola
lions, not only of the city ordinances,
but of common rules of safety that any
body without any expert knowledge
would have said was absolutely essen
tial at the Iroquois. But how the
mayor, who is simply at the head of
the city government. could be held re-
sponsible for any misconduct on his
part in view of this evidence 1 can not
conceive.
Analogous Suggestions.
ut seems to me it would have been
just as reasonable to say that because
an insane asylum was burned the gov
n could be held over by a coroner's
jury for being a party. a criminal party,
to such loss of life: and held over
criminally to a grand jury, because,
~forscoth, an insane asylum under the
charge of one of his appointees, the
| warden, had been burned.
1T seems to me it would be just as
logical to say that because there should
be a destruction of a building at West
Point or Annapolis by fire, and lives
should be lost there, the president of
the United States should be held ove
by q %coroner's jury to answer for an
indictment by a grand jury for Grim
inal completely.
Now the mayor of h city of Chi
| cago occupies relatively h same po-
sitton that the governor does and that
| the president does. 1t seems to me
that 1t is a very great wrong q don't
hesitate to say that under thee% evidence
4 or fhts ,a,or5 iicoIo~ou ff and under