One officer gambled in a saloon with a citizen, lost his money, overpowered the citizen, recovered his lost money and then robbed his victim.
In broad daylight an officer held up a citizen and robbed him of his money and valuables. When the Chief of Police had this case called to his attention before a legislative investigating committee, he answered, “I tried that man yesterday. He got on the police department ten years ago, and he always had a reputation of being a good officer, and the other morning he had been drinking some, and, like everything else, became a little indiscreet and started out to hold up a man and got hold of a few dollars in that way, and under the impression, very likely, that he would never be discovered, and, like everybody else, with his good record in the past, he was discharged and reinstated, because many people vouched for him, and all said he was an excellent officer, but he stepped by the wayside and fell, and we had him arrested and discharged.”
Whether the many people who so generously interceded with the Chief of Police for the retention of a thief as a member of his force were that thief’s fellow pals and hold-up men, was not disclosed; but it may be said without hazard, that they were not reputable men—if they had any existence at all other than in the imagination, and as part of the bewildering policy of an incapable Chief.
Methods of levying blackmail upon other than the disreputable classes, but reaching through them, upwards and beyond them, are not only countenanced, but advised by superior officials and approved by the city’s highest executive.
On the 5th of November, 1897, a practical stranger in the city was given the following letter, signed by the Chief of Police, viz.:
“To Whom It May Concern:
The police department is about to issue a history for the benefit of their relief fund. Kindly make all checks payable to W. V. M., East Chicago Avenue Station, and any favors shown the bearer will be appreciated by,
Yours truly,”
This stranger had been denounced through the press as a fraud and a schemer, who had been arrested in other cities for obtaining money under false pretenses, which facts were known to the Chief of Police when his letter of recommendation was written. The stranger was to receive a commission of twenty-five per cent on all subscriptions obtained by him, and the treasurer of the fund, who was selected with the approval of the Chief, the Mayor, and his principal political satellite, ten per cent. Some $8,000 were collected under this scheme, one large railroad corporation subscribing $1,000 and a noted Board of Trade operator $500. Whence the remainder came rests in conjecture, with a well defined belief that noted gamblers, and keepers of houses of ill fame, were contributors to it.
A legislative committee’s inquiries prevented the consummation of the scheme, but, owing to the speedy departure from the city of the treasurer, the source of the remaining subscriptions could not be inquired into.