Court Opinion

ID: 8610667
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-11-24 08:19:23.534082+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:11:33.997167
License: Public Domain

Smith, J.: The court has given this matter very careful consideration. The question now before the court seems to be whether or not such prejudice now exists in the minds of the inhabitants of this county that this defendant cannot get a fair and impartial trial in this county. And in the consideration of that •question it is brought to the attention of the court that on a former indictment against this defendant for the same offense a change of venue was allowed to another county with, as I understand, no opposition; that it has been substantially conceded by the state, up to about a year ago, that there was such a prejudice that the defendant would be entitled to a change of venue. Therefore, about the only question that is left to the court is whether or not during the past year there has been a change so that at the present time any feeling of prejudice against this defendant has so abated that he could now safely go to trial in this county. It would seem that there are very few occasions that in a great city like this a man would be entitled to a change of venue. So far as we can look forward and anticipate cases it is very seldom that circumstances arise that would make a situation in a great cosmopolitan city where a man would not get a fair and impartial trial. But it does seem on the other hand that if there were a case, a case similar to this would entitle a man to a change of venue. In a horrible catastrophe such as this was, where some six hundred lives were lost, I undertake to say that there is hardly a neighborhood in the city of Chicago and Cook county but what has some victim of that terrible fire, and it would seem to the court that a jury from this county would be influenced more or less, many of them, by the fact that their neighbors or their friends were interested in the outcome of this suit. However that may be, the court is confronted with a record here that seems to the court to allow but one conclusion. The defense has presented over twelve thousand affidavits in this case as to the prejudice, and the state something like four thousand. Now, while we all concede that it is not a matter of numbers, because if it were numbers that govern that would simply mean a contest in many counties between opposing factions until you get a majority of the people of an entire county who would testify one way or the other, but in this case there are over twelve thousand affidavits presented to the court; among them are hundreds and thousands of men who stand high, foremost citizens of the state, intelligent, the peers of any, men high in their efforts to enforce law and order, and it is difficult for the court to say that these men, prominent, influential citizens of Chicago, who come into this court and under oath testify, for that is substantially what they do, that this defendant cannot receive a fair and impartial trial on account of the prejudice of the inhabitants of this county—they must be entitled to some credence. Such men as Judge Payne, Dr. Emil Hirsch, Dr. Frank Billings, and hundreds of others, men who ought to know, men who it would seem would know what the situation is in this county, the court will hardly assume that these men are testifying to something that they know nothing about, or wilfully testifying to something that is not true. And with the testimony of so many men of influence and standing, so high in the community, it leaves the ■court nothing else to do on this record but grant a change of venue. Men of that character and in such vast numbers, puts the court in a position that this community is in such condition and frame of mind that their testimony cannot be ignored by the court on the record that is made here, and the motion will therefore be allowed. As to the county, counsel may confer upon that. The court will say this, however, that the court will not send it to any remote county in the state and not send it to any county except some county that can be easily reached from Chicago, that will be accessible and convenient. If counsel can agree upon such a county it will be perfectly satisfactory to the court, and if they cannot the court will determine.