Rock Island Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1893-1920, 1912-08-14
FORMAL VERDICT
FROM The JUDGE
IN RECALL CASE
Petitions Are Found to Be En-
tlrely insufficient and
Inadequate.
MANY, NAMES WORTHLESS
Evidence as Far as Gone Into Cuts Pc.
tions in Two-Statement Ac-
companies Finding.

Inc formal finding of Judge E c.
Graves as applied to the petitions for
the recall OF Mayor H. NJ. Schriver and
Commissioner Archie Hart was read
by the Judge this afternoon in the cir
cunt court. II was in accordance with
the results of the abruptly ended
nearing and declared the petition in
sufncient and inadequate to procure
the recall of the city officials.
The recall cases are therefore off.
cially ended and from every indication
there will be no more attempts to ap-
ply the law for the heads of the de-
teated move are almost unanimous
il their declaration that they will not
be identified with another
JUDGE MAKES STATEMENT.
Preceding the reading of the decree
as signed by the court, Judge Graves
read a lengthy statement reviewing
the case and explaining in detail the
procedure. The statement follows:
Before disposing of the merits of
this case | think it is due to the Of
icers of this court and to the wit.
nesses who have been summoned and
have attended this hearing and to
every person who in good faith sign
ed these petitions, or either of them.
and to the attorneys who represented
the respective parties at this hearing,
to make a few general statements.
This is a new law, containing many
new and novel features and provisions.
II has never been before the courts
foI construction as TO its provisions
concerning recall In a sense We have
in this proceeding been blazing a new
path through an unknown wilderness.
UNJUST CRITICISM.
Some unjust criticism has been ex-
pressed by persons who did not know
what they were talking about because
the Hon. George w. Gamble presented
these petitions to me- and because
thereafter at the request of some of
the parties interested in this proceed
ing he issued subpoenas for witnesses.
The law expressly provides that when
a petition for recall is filed with the
clark Of the circuit court together with
the objections thereto, it is the duty
VI iudN 'ltl n " upCu INC
filing of the same with him forthwith
present the same to the Judge of that
court or some one of the judges of that
court II is further provided that any
officer who shall willfully
OF through culpable negligence fail to
comply with any of the provisions of
this section AZ shall be subject TO a
fine OF not more than 5000 or impris-
oument in the county Jail not exceed,
ing six months. or both such fine and
Imprisonment and may be removed
from Office
FORCED UPON GRAVES.
Upon the presentation of this peti.
ton to Mr. Gamble. am advised he
consulted with the late Judge Gest 10
ascertain if he would be able TO con.
duct the hearing required under the
law, and having ascertained that he
would not, and knowing that Judge
Ramsay was out of the state on his
vacation and would not likely return
until near the middle of September
there was but one thing he could do
and that was 10 present il 10 me. who
vas the only one of the judges OF the
court of which he was the clerk thai
was able to attend TO business &c
whom he could present IL. II he had
waited In the hope OF Judge Gest's re
covery or for the return Of Judge Ram
say he would undoubtedly have beer
liable under the section above quoted
for a willful neglect of a manifest
duty.
HAD TO ISSUE WRITS.
AS to the issuance OF subpOenas b!
him: These were issued upon the re
quest OF parties interested The
statute in express terms gives th'
court or the Judge or the judges there
Of in vacation authority and jurisdic
ton TO determine in a summary man
rer the sUfficienCy of such petition. /
was construed by the attorneys a
least for the officers. and rightly 50
J think. that that clause gave to th'
Judge hearing the controversy tn
right TO command the attendance o
witnesses and examine them on oatl
as 10 the merits Of the contention I
court is the usual method Of securing
the attendance Of witnesses. He VA
"a doubt as to the propriety OF issu
ing them, but upon his attention be
Ing called TO the provisions above quot
e as TO the penalties that might b,
imposed for a willful or negligent fail
ure to perform a duty. he very prop
erly determined TO and did issue IN,
same as requested. upon the theor,
that when in doubt one should Away,
resolve that doubt in favor of the SAT,
course of action He undoubtedly dit
right and as ! would have directed hin
To do il had been called into con
sultation with hi mon that subject.
QUESTION To DECIDE.
There is one more thing / desir,
10 speak of before stating what tn,
evidence discloses. am INFORMED
that some of the petitioners believ,
that the object of this hearing is to de
termine whether Mayor Schriver AM
Commissioner Hart by reason IF tn,
manner in which they have respect
lively conducted their Offices deserve I,
be recalled. That is a mistake Tn,
merits OF the controversy between
these officers and those who seek thei
recall is in no way involved in thi!
hearing There is no specific charg,
made in the petitions for a recall
against these officers whereby an,