Part 2: 4: Violence

4. There were occasional bursts of violence.

 
A bump between Austrians and Italians all of whom “had been drinking” near midnight November 1, 1916 quickly escalated when an Italian pulled out a revolver and shot Joe Petrie in the leg with a .32 caliber bullet. The Austrians fled, but returned to the scene within a half hour “armed with shotguns, revolvers and clubs,” but the Italians had already dispersed. The wounded man was expected to recover, but the incident only hints at the degree of ethnic tension that must have simmered beneath the surface of daily existence on Market street.(1)

A confrontation around a fruit and vegetable  cart escalated into near murder when Max Lurie, a peddler was driving north on Market street near Water around six pm when “one of the Italian families that lives at the junction of the two streets came behind his wagon and pulled three bananas from a bunch.” While Lurie claims to have ignored this first bit of pilfering, he tried to stop another man who attempted to take an entire bunch. Heated words were exchanged, the Italian says Lurie hit him in the head with a dinner pail, leaving an inch-ling wound. This was soon followed by a brick being thrown at Lurie by another Italian joining from nearby, breaking “a couple” of Lurie ribs, followed by sight of an “elderly” man rushing from an nearby house with a rifle leveled at Lurie and pulling the trigger; Failure of the gun to discharge saved Lurie’s life, and he took refuge from the mob wielding sticks and bottles in a nearby saloon until police arrived to break up the melee. The assailants were arrested and fine $10 each. (2)

A tripping incident at a  dance at a Market street boarding house turned into “a riot.” According to Peter Raebeck:  “I was invited to the dance at the boarding house. The table in the dining room was heaped up high with food and there was beer and whiskey and pop in large quantities. I was dancing with the boarding house boss’s wife when someone tripped me. She fell. I grabbed her up in my arms and in a second’s time there was a free for all fight. I defended myself and got out of the house as quick as possible.”  “When Bart Tyrrell and another policeman reached the boarding house the boss stood in his bare feet on the porch and the guests had taken their departure.” Peter was found near by, arrested and paid a fine of $3. (3)

Frank Grasley of Market street stabbed Han Yerina one Sunday evening  in May, 1911, and put up a “terrible,” though unsuccessful, “ fight to resist arrest.” (4)

An argument between Alla Aza and another Turk one evening on Market street and ended when Aza pulled a revolver; another man tried to grab the gun away, and the gun fired and them man lost a finger for his efforts. The shot drew the attention of neighbors, and as police approached, Aza took off “with the fleetness of a deer” up the Northwest railroad track, with police as well as other incensed local residents in hot pursuit. (5)

 Frank Udas was severely beaten for attending a Market street wedding without an invitation and refusing to leave. The weapon used was apparently a water pitcher, which landed him in the hospital. (6)

Another Market street wedding led to a “small sized riot” one Sunday in August, 1905, after neighbors complained of “noise and rowdyism emanating from one of the houses rented by foreigners.” Police attempts to “subdue” the crowd resulted in a battle with beer bottles, clubs, four arrests “and a number of heads beaten.” (7)

A “terrific fight” one Saturday evening left Tony Train “considerably cut up”  from a bottle that had been broken over his head. “Frank Jagel who was arrested on the charge of making the assault was fined $3.” (8)

Louis Della Valle, Mexican pool hall proprietor at 618 Market street was found to have shot Armada Balcazar  in self defense after Balcazar had come at him with a knife. Balcazar, who boasted of being a bandit with Pancho Villa for two years and having the scars to prove it, had become aggressive after Valle refused to lend him another $6 for the second time that night. The police noted with “considerable amusement” that a game of pool seemed to continue without interruption while the altercation and shooting occurred. (9)

Walter Nuby of 211 Market was shot in the arm  in a “shooting scrape” at a dance in 1920. He was shot by “the best of friends” Sam Morris, in a dispute over money, somewhat “befuddled” by the consumption of moonshine.(10)

Muncie Baily, 41 years old, residing at 113 Market street admitted to stabbing James Green in November of 1922, whom he accused of steal a watch that he was missing. (11)

Mr Baily was again accused of cutting in 1926, this time Hollister Keaton of 502 Market street during an argument over a dice game in 1926, but Keaton did not press charges against him. (12)

Henry white and his wife were sitting in Martha Abbotts’ restaurant on Market street when Steve Wennes, 55 “insisted upon dancing with Mrs. White and taking liberties with her.” A blow followed, and Mr Wennes fell head first through a window, though was not serious injured. Wennes was white and the Whites were black. (13)

Joe Ogsen was sitting in the kitchen of his home at  714 Market street one Sunday evening in June of 1920 after the children had been put to bed,  “when the door was opened unceremoniously and two young men walked in demanding intoxicating liquor. Ogsen says he told them they were in the wrong house—that he had no liquor to sell. Whereupon he says the young men showed a desire to fight and he found it necessary to throw them out of the house bodily.” A few minutes later, five windows were broken by large pieces of broken concrete. One suspect was arrested on the corner of Market and Belvedere but the other seems to have slipped away. (14)

Augustin Arroyo, formerly of Market street, was arrested in 1933 for the murder of Frank Martinez,36, of 541 Market street. Arroyo “told the police that he and Martinez had been playing cards in a saloon at 548 Market street, but that Martinez had got up and left the game. He returned shortly after and bought a bottle of beer and started to leave. Arroyo was leaving at the same time and together they walked to the street, where Martinez said, according to Arroyo, that the other card players had been laughing at him during the game. Arroyo denied this but he said Martinez whipped out a knife and stabbed him in the leg.” When Arroyo fled, Martinez pursued him, threatening to kill him, until Arroyo shot him. Frank Grobelch jr, 516 Market street heard the shooting and called the police. “Police learned that Martinez and Arroyo had had trouble before, and that they had frequently had heated arguments but continued to appear on friendly terms.” (15) Arroyo was eventually cleared of murder charges, and the shooting was ruled as self-defense. (16)

 

John Duncan shot Hansome Oates when he found his common-law wife Annabelle “visiting” Mr. Oates in his room at 513 Market street. Oates had tried to protect Annabelle when Duncan started to beat her with a coal shovel, and the fight continued outside in the back yard, where several shots were fired. Though recovering in the county hospital “with a bullet in his head and one in his chest,” Oates’ condition was  not regarded as serious. (17)

 

In May, 1945, Lucuius (George) Ware shot and killed his cousin James Hill of 585 Market Street in front of the Lake Breeze Refreshment Stand, after an argument about ownership of a $25 war bond. (18, 19)

Archie Huley, also of 585 Market, was charged in the August 1, 1953 fatal shooting of Joseph Thomas, “in an argument over $5 and a package of cigarettes after a drinking bout.” (20)

 

Willie Harrell, 54, of 561 Market was arrested for the shooting of Ronald Hamilton, 25, whom he claims to have seen descending from a porch roof at his home. The exact circumstances were murky, and a Lieutenant at the Great Lakes Naval Center, where Hamilton worked as a dental technician, described the victim’s moral character as “above average and his honesty and integrity above reproach.” (21)

In another odd case, In September, 1955, Marine SSgt Robert A Martens, aged 22, in civilian clothes, apparently tried to break into the second floor apartment of Miss Lexie Huston, 48, of 430 Market. The rear porch door had been pulled from its frame and the glass inner door was smashed during the break-in. Miss Huston’s screams summoned Lewis Williams, a roomer in the building, who shot Martens three times, killing him. Martens, who had seen duty in the far east and in San Francisco, had only been at the Great Lakes Naval center for about a week and was awaiting his discharge scheduled for November 9. Both Williams and Huston were held as material witnesses, but no charges were filed against them.(22)

George Washington, 46, of 610 Market Street, a school janitor, pleaded guilty to the murder of Ezell Mitchell. “The slaying occurred in front of Washington's home after he alleged his divorced wife Ernestine, with whom he was still living, had gone out with Mitchell.” Washington was sentenced to 25 years in the penitentiary.(23)

 Samuel Hicks of 514 Market street Waukegan was shot and killed one Saturday night in 1965 in Viera’s Tavern at 540 Market by Elizabeth Mims of Evanston “after he slashed her with a knife.” (24)

Mrs. Addie DeVost, of 205 Market was also sentenced to the Women’s Reformatory at Dwight, in October of 1960. She was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder of her third common-law husband, Samuel Conner the previous May.

Mr. Conner was the third husband murdered by Mrs. DeVost. She had killed her first husband, Arthur DeVost in 1953 by chopping him with an ax, and her second husband James Rice with a shotgun blast in 1956. She was acquitted in both previous cases as acting in self-defense.(25)

Judge William M Carroll rejected Mrs. DeVost’s appeal and guilty plea by reason of insanity, even though she claimed “voices” told her to pound Conner with a hammer in the room they shared at 205 Market. Mrs. DeVost was 44 at the time of her conviction.(26)

Peter Blomstrom of 713 Market, told his wife that he was not feeling well one October morning in 1908, and would stay at home from his job at the wire mill. Later that day, his wife took their five-year old daughter out with her to visit a neighbor. John Hall, a forman at the wire mill happened to be walking past the Blomstrom home that afternoon when he heard screams from inside, and went in to investigate. He found Blomstrom chocking his 4 year old son, Peter Junior, in a :”fit of insanity.” “I’ll kill you, too!” shouted the maniac, leaping upon Hall. In the struggle which ensued Hall was badly bruised.” Neighbors and police soon came to the rescue, and Blomstriom was taken to jail “after a struggle.” Young Peter Blomstrom died, and Mrs Mrs Blomstrom was “overcome by grief.” (27)

James Montgomery

In 1923, James Montgomery was 30 and a veteran of the Great War, living modestly with his wife Sentoria in the home he owned, when he was visited by Lake County Assistant District Attorney A.V Smith’s “sponge squad” looking for bootleg liquor or stills. The officers found nothing on his property, and were in fact at the wrong address, but had caused considerable damage to Montgomery’s home. Montgomery sued the State’s Attorney for damages and was awarded $125. (28)

Montgomery was arrested on November 11, 1923 on the accusation of having raped 62 year old Mamie Snow.  Miss Snow was somewhat known around town as an itinerant peddler of shoelaces, notions and needle and thread, who would often engage her “customers” in “conversations of a highly irrelevant nature,” as one person described, and “peculiarities about her speech and manner” leading him to believe that she was “mentally irresponsible” though seemingly harmless.(29) After making the claim against Montgomery, Miss Snow was sent to Victory Memorial Hospital for examination.  At the police station the next day, however, she failed to identify Montgomery as her attacker, going to far as saying "I never saw this fellow before in my life." (29) Despite the questionable credibility of the accuser, Montgomery was held without bail and beaten in custody so severely that the scars were visible on his head and face for the rest of his life. The state’s attorney himself warned Montgomery against perusing his freedom. “If you were down in Georgia or Mississippi where you come from,” he was later quoted as saying,” we would turn you over to the Ku Klux Klan and we are liable to do it up here now; you know I am a member of that organization." (29)
While James Montgomery had no previous criminal record or run-ins with law enforcement besides the mistaken raid, there had been an arrest in 1920 of a James Montgomery in North Chicago for attempting assault of 60-year old Mary Rintz. There is no evidence that this was the same James Montgomery as the 1923 case, but it is worth noting that the North Chicago man “was spirited to the county jail by the North Chicago police who feared an attempt to lynch him might be made.” (30)
(In another local case, in 1921, 16 year old Scott Garner was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment for making a “fiendish assault” on Mrs. John Mason, an elderly cripple in Zion City. Jury deliberations were stalled in that case not by questions of quilt, but only on the severity of the punishment. The District Attorney at the time hailed the verdict “in order that the community may be made safe for white women” and the press hailed the sentence “on the negro moron, the most dangerous the community ever has had.” (31))
Klan activity in the Waukegan area was widely known at the time. A public rally at Grayslake in 1924 was only sparsely attended—indoors at the local Opera house—due to bad weather. The speaker visiting from Texas blamed the press, which had been bought, he claimed, by the Klan’s enemies, for the public bias against the organization, which stood for “Law and Order, and keeping America for Americans.”  At the end of the assembly, “Cards were passed out and those who felt so inclined were given a chance to express a desire to become a member. Several took advantage and signed up.” (32)
In 1922, flyers began to appear around Waukegan listing alphabetically the names of local Klan members. The list contained  “the names of many prominent local men, a number being county officials and employees and city employees. The first list contains about 100 names and the circular states that others will follow. It is rumored that there are about 800 members of the Klan in Waukegan.” (33) The authenticity and accuracy of the list could not be confirmed, and was therefore not reprinted in the local newspapers, but does hint at significant influence and support of the secretive organization in Waukegan.
The doctor who examined Miss Snow concluded that she was still a virgin, and had not been raped. He reported his findings to the police. Montgomery’s trial in January lasted twenty minutes. The doctor’s report was not admitted into evidence. Montgomery did not testify, and his defense lawyer, from fear of later retribution, did not put up much of a defense, failing to call the 12 witnesses whom Montgomery said could provide his alibi.
Montgomery was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison in January, 1924.
At Statesville prison, he was considered a “model prisoner.”  (28) Nathan Leopold, the convicted murderer of Booby Franks with “Dickie’ Loeb, taught Montgomery to read and write. 24 years after Montgomery  first entering prison, attorney Luis Kutner heard of his case while visiting another client, and started a 2-year investigation. In 1949, Kutner filed a writ of Habeas Corpus to have the case reviewed, and  Judge Michael L Igoe overturned the conviction and Montgomery was freed after serving 26 years of a life sentence.
“A prosecutor,” Judge Igoe wrote in his decision, “ is supposed to be an impartial representative of public justice. The methods employed by the prosecution at Lake County in 1924 represents as shocking a situation as ever before presented before this court. A society cannot suppress lawlessness by an accused through the means of lawlessness of the prosecution. A society cannot inspire respect for the law by withholding its protection from those accused of crimes. It was and is the prosecuting attorney's duty to assist in giving a fair trial to a defendant…
To condone the methods evident in this case, is to invite grave injustice. There is one way to stop a practice that has become altogether too common and that is to bring it to a conscious level where the public can scrutinize it and take such steps as are necessary to insure a true rendition of justice to all, regardless of race, color or creed…. There was no trial here, but a sham, one of false pretenses and fraud.” (29)
Montgomery was given $10 at his release from prison, the standard amount given to freed prisoners. Montgomery, then 56, returned to his wife, ill with diabetes at 533 Market Street, but hoped to move away from Waukegan, since he no longer felt comfortable there.
“Although he brought suit against the state for his illegal conviction and imprisonment, the Illinois Court of Claims refused to make any payment on the ground that the prosecutor was a county official and the state had no responsibility for his conduct. For many years after that legislation was introduced to compensate Montgomery, but no bill succeeded in passing.” (34)

Notes

(1) Austrians and Italians battle; one is shot in leg, Libertyville Independent Nov 2, 1916, p6

(2) Italians mob fruit peddler, Libertyville Independent, Oct 5, 1906, p12

(3) (Jan 4, 1917 Dance ends in a riot; Libertyville Independent         

(4) Two stabbed in fight Lake County Independent and Waukegan Weekly Sun, May 12, 1911, p8

(5) (June 28, 1912 Shoots finger off man’s hand Libertyville independent,  p8)

(6) Lake County Independent, June 2, 1905, P4

(7) Lake County Independent, Aug 4, 1905, P4

(8) Lake County Independent, Sept 15, 1905, P4

(9) Exonerate Valle who killed ex-villa bandit Libertyville independent, July 29, 1920, p10

(10) 2 under arrest as result of a shooting scrape Libertyville independent, April 8, 1920, p12

(11) Slashes Negro whom he thinks took his watch Libertyville independent, Nov 23, 1922, p9

(12) Negro cut; will not prosecute , Waukegan Daily Sun and Waukegan Daily Gazette, Monday June 14, 1926, p1

(13) Man is hurled head first thru a heavy window  Libertyville independent, Dec 28, 1922, p8

(14) Demand booze; ejected; proceed to stone house Libertyville independent, June 3, 1920, p6

(15) Mexican held in murder case, Waukegan News-sun, Monday April 17,1933, p1

(16) Arroyo absolved on shooting case, Waukegan news-sun, Tuesday April 18, 1933,p1

(17) Negro sought for shooting, The Waukegan News-Sun, Monday January 23 1933, p1

 (18) Slain bond quarrel; cousin seized as killer Chicago Tribune, Sun, May 6, 1945, p 22

(19) Held in killing of cousin Chicago Tribune, Sun, May 6, 1945, p 6

(20)  Indict Waukegan man for slaying over $5 Chicago Tribune, Tue Sept 15, 1953, p36

(21) Ask grand Jury quiz in death old navy dental aid Chicago Tribune, Wed Nov 7, 1951, p26

(22)  Marine killed after forcing way into flat, Chicago Tribune, Fri Sept 16, 1955, p58

(23) Waukegan janitor gets 25 years for murder Chicago Tribune, Tues Jan 19, 1954, p28

(24)  Woman, 28, held in killing of Waukegan man Chicago Tribine, Mon Feb 1, 1965

(25)  Order woman back to cell as murderer Chicago Tribune, Tues July 25, 1961, p 14

(26)  Widow, 44 gets life in prison for 3rd killing Chicago Tribune, Tue Oct 25, 1960, p35

(27)  Insane Waukegan Father Chokes His Son To Death , Chicago Tribune, Oct 21, 1908

(28)  He’s catching up with liberty St Louis Post-Dispatch, St Louis, Missouri, Sun, Sept 11, 1949, p119

(29)   86 F. Supp. 382 (1949) UNITED STATES ex rel. MONTGOMERY v. RAGEN. No. 48 C 1564.United States District Court N. D. Illinois, E. D.August 10, 1949.    

(30)  Man charged with assaulting aged woman gets stay Libertyville independent, Oct 28, 1920, p6

(31) A life sentence for negro who attacked old woman, Libertyville Independent, Thursday Jan 13, 1921

(32) Klu Klux hold meet at Greylake Antioch News, April 3, 1924

(33) Alleged “expose” of Ku Klux Klan here is printed Libertyville Independent, Thursday Dec 7, 1922

(34) The innocents by Radin, Edward D 1964 New York, Morrow, p 47-49

 

Appendix

 (1) Austrians and Italians battle; one is shot in leg, Libertyville Independent Nov 2, 1916, p6

Austrians and Italians battle; one is shot in leg

The Austrian and Italian residents of market street clashed at midnight and although all were armed to the teeth, but one man met injury. The one man was Joe Petrie, an employee of Mocknic, who conducts a soft drink parlor in north Chicago.

Petrie was shot in the leg with a .32 caliber bullet and it was found necessary to take him to a doctor’s office to have his wound dressed. No report of the fracas was made to the police, and no arrests have been made as of yet.
It is said that all men in the party had been drinking and when the two Austrians bumped into the Italians on the sidewalk near midnight the Italian whipped out a revolver and fired at one of the Austrians. The Austrians took to their heels as soon as the Italians showed their weapons, but within a half hour’s time they had returned to the scene of the disturbance armed with shot guns, revolvers and clubs. The Italians were not to be found. The injured man was taken to north Chicago to have his wound dressed by Dr. Connell. The police are making an investigation.

 

(2) Italians mob fruit peddler, Libertyville Independent, Oct 5, 1906, p12

Italian mob fruit peddler

Is struck with bricks and stones—gun failed to work or he might have murdered—was endeavoring to protect property

What might have been a murder was averted only by the failure to work of the trigger on a shot gun in the hands of an Italian Thursday night, when max Lurie, a peddler, was mobbed and beaten  by Italian laborers for residing alleged attempts to steal a bunch of bananas from a load that he was drawing home.
Lurie was driving north on market street near water last evening near 6 o’clock when one of the Italian families that lives at the junction of the two streets came behind his wagon and pulled two or three bananas from a bunch.
Lurie says he paid no attention to this. However, the man of twenty or so began to make attempts to pull away an entire bunch and Lurie says he got off the wagon to stop him.
The Italian says that Lurie swore horribly at him and threatened him.
At any rate, he raised a dinner pail that he carried and with it smote Lurie such a terrific crack on the head that the pail inflicted a wound about an inch long
Nearly mobbed by Italian
Then another of the  family, which abounds in men, is alleged to have picked up a brick and with it hit Lurie on the left side, almost smashing a couple of ribs.
The attack was on. An elderly man is alleged to have rushed from the house with a rifle or shot gun.
He leveled it at Lurie, Lurie says. He jerked at the trigger. The gun would not work. Otherwise murder would have been committed, lurie says.
Stick and bottles for him
Lurie fought off his assailants as best he could and called on L Coven on another load of bananas to the rear to help him.
Coven ran for the nearest telephone to get the police on the wire and meantime helpless Lurie was surrounded by an Italian mob, he says, and pelted with sticks, stones and bricks until on the run he sought refuge in a saloon at the corner of Water and Market street, where he waited until the police came and then pointed out his alleged assailants, Mer, Jo and Dimitri Smillus, who were arrested and this morning faced judge Weiss on an assault charge.
The three alleged assailant were fined $10 and costs in a state case.

 

(3) (Jan 4, 1917 Dance ends in a riot; Libertyville Independent         

Dance ends in a riot; One man arrested by police

Waukegan Dec 28

Peter Raebeck, gateman at the South ave crossing of the Northwester railroad, was waiting about the rooms of a boarding house on Market street near midnight Wednesday with another man’s wife in his arms. Some one tripped Peter. He let the other man’s wife fall. In a second’s time the boarding house became a madhouse. The house boss grappled with Peter while his daughter ran to the phone and summoned the patrol.
When Bart Tyrrell and another policeman reached the boarding house the boss stood in his bare feet on the porch and the guests had taken their departure.
Peter was caught as he turned a corner and was taken to the police station where he spent the night. This morning he was liberated after paying a fine of $3 and costs. Peter explains the fight in the following words:
“I was invited to the dance at the boarding house. The table in the dining room was heaped up high with food and there was beer and whiskey and pop in large quantities. I was dancing with the boarding house boss’s wife when someone tripped me. She fell. I grabbed her up in my arms and in a second’s time there was a free for all fight. I defended myself and got out of the house as quick as possible. I didn’t go there to fight and I didn’t go there to drink. During the dance one of the boarders came to me and suggested that I give him $1. I suppose the money was in payment for the liquor consumed. I want a warrant for the boarding house proprietor.”
Pete didn’t get a warrant, but he did pay a fine.

 

 (4) Two stabbed in fight Lake County Independent and Waukegan Weekly Sun, May 12, 1911, p8

Two stabbed in fight

Following a cutting affray Sunday night, beginning no one knows how, Frank Grasley of Market street was arrested as the alleged stabber and Han Yerina next morning faced him as accuser before Police Magistrate Taylor. Attorney William F Weiss represented Grassler [sic] and secured a continuance until Friday at 7:30 o’clock.

Officer Tom Baron heard a great outcry from the Market street boarding house near 1 o’clock Sunday night and entering found Yerina had been stabbed in the ribs, a cut three inches deep, while Frank Derein had had his coat slashed open. The officer [sic] pursued the fleeing Grassler [sic] who put up a terrible fight to resist arrest, and landed him in the city jail after Grassler had ripped the officer’s coat sleeve nearly to his shoulder and had fought vigorously clear to the jail doors.
 

(5) (June 28, 1912 Shoots finger off man’s hand Libertyville independent,  p8)

Shoots finger off man’s hand

Alla Aza, a Turk, is arrested after he had been chased almost a mile

Alla Aza, a Turk living at 801 Market street was arrested last night by the Waukegan police after a chase of nearly a mile, for having shot off the finger of a countryman in a fight which took place about 7 o’clock last night on Market street.
Aza and some of his countrymen got into a quarrel Monday night and as it waxed warmer he drew a revolver and apparently was about to discharge it at a member of the party. Before the explosion could take place another fellow, whose name is not yet been learned, sprang forward and grabbed the end of the weapon and tried to turn it aside.
At this moment the weapon was discharged and the bullet several one of the victim’s fingers.
The disturbance aroused some of the neighbors and Aza hurried from the house. A few minutes later he saw two policemen driving toward him in a police rig. His mind was made up in a second and he started with the fleetness of a deer up the railroad tracks of the Northwestern toward the sugar refinery. Two or there of his own countrymen who were incensed at his actions, joined in the pursuit and because they had nearly a block the start of the police succeeded in catching up with them. Aza seemed almost frightened to death the police came up.
He submitted to arrest quietly and was taken to the police station. It is believed he will be given a hearing today. The man who lost his finger was taken to Dr. Kalowsky, where the injury was attended to.
 

(6) Lake County Independent, June 2, 1905, P4

Because Frank Udas attended a wedding on Market street without the proper qualifications in the shape of an invitation he was ordered from the house and refusing to go was set upon by the invited guests and beaten nearly to death. It is claimed that a water pitcher was the weapon used and the results show the weapon was very effective. Udas was sent to the hospital and later swore out warrants for the arrest of his assailants.

 

(7) Lake County Independent, Aug 4, 1905, P4

Waukegan had a small sized riot at a Market street wedding last Sunday night and five who attended to quell the disturbance barely succeeded in getting off with their lives. Early in the evening neighbors began to complain of noise and rowdyism emanating from one of the houses rented by foreigners and two policemen were sent at first to subdue them but the occupants of the place who were guests at a wedding showed fight and the officers telephoned for aid. The reinforcements arriving the policemen marched five strong to the house and demanded that they be more orderly. At this a fusillade of beer bottles and clubs was fired by the wedding guests and an immediate attack by the officers followed in which four arrests were made and a number of heads beaten. After the melee it was discovered that two of the policemen lost their stars having had them torn off during the rumpus.

 

(8) Lake County Independent, Sept 15, 1905, P4

A terrific fight on Market street last Saturday evening resulted in a broken head for one man and a fine for another. The injured man, Tony Train, was considerably cut up about the head and neck his opponent in the combat using a beer bottle to advantage breaking it over his head and slashing him with the pieces. Train’s injuries necessitated the attendance of a physician. Frank Jagel who was arrested on the charge of making the assault was fined $3 and costs before Justice Hope Monday.

 

(9) Exonerate Valle who killed ex-villa bandit Libertyville independent, July 29, 1920, p10

Exonerate Valle who killed ex-villa bandit

Coroner’s jury returns verdict that pool hall man shot in self-defense

Bullet entered spine
Louis Della Valle, Mexican pool hall proprietor, 618 Market street on Tuesday night was exonerated in the killing of Armada Balcazar who was shot by Valle Saturday night in the latter’s pool hall when he drew a knife upon the defendant and threatened to kill him unless he got the $6 he demanded.
The coroner’s jury returned a verdict stating that Valle had shot in self defense. Only one shot as fired, which struck Balcazar in the neck just below the Adam’s apple, puncturing his windpipe. The bullet embedded itself in the neck within a fraction of an inch from the spinal cord, felling the aggressor after he had forced Valle to retreat to within a few feet of the wall by brandishing a pocket knife.
Played as battle raged
Considerable amusement was lent to the inquest which was held at the Wtzel and Petterson undertaking rooms by the fact that although a fatal battle was being staged the (?) other Mexicans in the poolroom at the time continued to play pool while the fight was in progress and after the shot had been fired and Balcazar was writhing on the floor between the two pool tables where the men were having their little game. According to the testimony the game was interrupted only a short time after the fatal shot had been fired.
Attorney JA Miller, who defended Valle advanced the suggestion that the men were playing a time game and wanted their money’s worth.
Valle was the first person to be placed on the witness stand. He told a straight story and convinced the jury he fired the shot only after having repeatedly warned Balcazar he would shoot unless the latter retreated or left the building, and that he pulled the trigger only as a last resort.
The pocket knife was found on the floor near Balcazar’s body by police officers Earl Hicks and Lawrence Hicks and Lawrence McDermott.
Had battle scars
Valle testified that Balcazar had frequently declared he had been a bandit for Pancho Villa in Mexico for two years prior to his coming to Waukegan a year ago and bore several scars of the battle.
Ville stated he served in the United States Navy for 21 months in active service as a cabin steward and has an honorable discharge.
Valle testified that he first befriended Balcazar a year ago when the later the sick in the Kenosha hospital by getting him home to Waukegan to his wife and family to whom he advanced money for food and that up to the night of the shooting they had never had a quarrel.
The testimony showed that Balcazar had borrowed $6 from Valle early Saturday evening, returned an hour later and demanded a similar amount, and when refused by Valle who stated be believed Balcazar was under the influence of liquor or a drug of some kind, he started the altercation that resulted in Valle being compelled to shoot Balcazar.
The verdict exonerating Valle was handed coroner JL Taylor at 10 o’clock last night after a three hour investigation.

 

(10) 2 under arrest as result of a shooting scrape Libertyville independent, April 8, 1920, p12

2 under arrest as result of a shooting scrape

Walter Nuby, colored man, shot through his arm at a dance early today

Assailant gives self up
Walter Nuby, aged 18 a colored man living at 211 Market street received a shot in his arm early this morning—not a shot of (?) Walter will tell the world that…But a real bone to…(?) …inflicted by a .38 caliber revolver in the hands of Sam Morris, aged 47 also colored, living at 212 east Lake street. Both men are under arrest on the charge of assault with a deadly weapon. They were arraigned in police court this morning…(?)… Bail was fixed at $10,000 each.
Nuby showed no enmity against Morris this morning, asserting that they always had been best of friends. The drinking of “raisin (?) Mash” he said befuddled both of them and Morris lost his head and opened fire following a hot dispute over money.
The shooting took place in the Market street building where a number of colored people were holding a danced. According to Nuby he gave someone a ten dollar bill to cash and forgot who he had given it to. Someone told Morris. When he asked Morris to (?) and insisted on it’s being done there were hot words and the shooting started. Morris had…(?) The police were informed that Nuby also shot but he later denied…(?) he admitted however that he had had a gun.
Morris hurried from the building after the shooting and went to the home of asst. Chief Tyrrell where he said he thought he had shot a woman and wanted to give himself up. He was removed to the police station. At the same time the police patrol (?) was sent to Market street and Nuby was taken to the hospital where his arm was dressed. He then was returned to the police station. The shooting is said to have taken place between two and three o’clock this morning.

 

(11) Slashes Negro whom he thinks took his watch Libertyville independent, Nov 23, 1922, p9

Slashes Negro whom he thinks took his watch

Muncie Baily charged with assault with deadly weapon Sunday

Victim in the hospital
Muncie Baily, 41 years old, a negro residing at 113 Market street was placed under arrest Sunday afternoon at 3:30 o’clock on a charge of stabbing James Green, 38 years old, also colored, of 211 Lake street. Green, weak from loss of blood, was removed by the police to the victory memorial hospital where he received emergency treatment. He was attended by Dr. M J Kaye. The stabbing took place in a negro residence.
The police received a call about (?) 3:15 o’clock Sunday afternoon that a man had been stabbed. They found Green suffering from a long gash on the head and minor cuts on the wrist and palm where he had sought to ward off the keen-edged knife wielded by his assailant. He was rushed to the hospital where it was feared for some time that the severe loss of blood would prove fatal.
The officers hurried back to the café where the stabbing affair had taken place. Bailey was just in the act of walking across the street casually having made no attempt to get away. He was removed to the police station where a charge of assault with a deadly weapon was placed against him.
According to the police he admitted the stabbing. He is alleged to have told then that he was informed Saturday night by a friend that Green had stolen a watch he had missed a few days before. He is said to have admitted that he started out at once to find Green but was not successful until Sunday afternoon.
Bailey was arraigned in court today. His case was continued for ten days pending the outcome of the victim’s condition. Bonds were fixed at $500.
 

(12) Negro cut; will not prosecute , Waukegan Daily Sun and Waukegan Daily Gazette, Monday June 14, 1926, p1

Negro cut; will not prosecute

Dr. R G Smith called up the local police Sunday night at 8:30 o’clock and reported that he had just taken care of a negro named Hollister Keaton of 502 Market street who had received cuts from either a knife or a razor. Capt. Kennedy and policeman Hicks went to Keaton’s home where he explained that he had been cut as a result of an argument with Muncie Bailey over a dice game. He declined to prosecute his assailant.

 

(13) Man is hurled head first thru a heavy window  Libertyville independent, Dec 28, 1922, p8

Man is hurled head first thru a heavy window

Seeks to fondle a negro woman in café and her husband objects

Henry white, 38 years old, negro, and his wife, Mrs. Louis Craig White, 672 Clinton street, Waukegan, were arrested late Saturday on a charge of having attacked Steve Wennes, 55 years old, a white man living at 149 south Genesee street.
It appeared that the three were in a restaurant conducted by Martha Abbott, a colored woman, on Market street. The police say that Wennes insisted upon dancing with Mrs. White and taking liberties with her. The woman’s husband objected and gave Wennes a blow, causing him to plunge head first through a window, cutting his face painfully. He was attended at the police station by Dr. M J Kaye. The injuries were not serious.
He three were placed under arrest by Harold Nottinghan and Fred Morey. They spent the night in the city jail and were released Christmas morning. Wennes, according to the police, had been drinking at the time of the trouble.
 

(14) Demand booze; ejected; proceed to stone house Libertyville independent, June 3, 1920, p6

Demand booze; ejected; proceed to stone house

The police were called to the Joe Ogsen home 714 Market street about 10:30 o’clock Sunday night by a complaint that two young men had hurled large pieces of broken (?) concrete sidewalk through the windows, breaking five of them.

John Fleming, 319 South Genesee street was arrested by the police and locked up in the city jail to await trial on the charge of having been one of them men. The police ran across him at the corner of Belvedere and Market streets. He was taken to the Ogsen home where he was identified by Ogsen. The police learned the name of the second young man and are endeavoring to locate him, although they have been informed he has left town.
According to the story told the police by Ogsen he and a friend were sitting in the kitchen talking. Mrs. Ogsen and the children having gone to bed, when the door was opened unceremoniously and two young men walked in demanding intoxicating liquor. Ogsen says he told them they were in the wrong house—that he had no liquor to sell. Whereupon he says the young men showed a desire to fight and he found it necessary to throw them out of the house bodily.
A few minutes later, he says, the heavy pieces of cement were hurled through the windows. The police took the sections of rock to the police station where they are keeping them for evidence. Each stone weighs several pounds and is a formidable missile.

(15) Mexican held in murder case, Waukegan News-sun, Monday April 17,1933, p1

Mexican held in murder case

Augustin Arroyo claims he shot Frank Martinez to save self from death

Augustin Arroyo a Mexican residing at 110 south county street is being held under charge of murder following a battle on Market street Saturday night that left Frank Martinez,36, of 541 Market street lying dead on the sidewalk and Arroyo himself suffering from a deep gash on the left leg just above the knee.
Police were called to the scene by Frank Grobelch jr, 516 Market street, who heard the shooting. They found Martinez dead, and after the body was removed to the Holland morgue, they learned from Greta Martinez and Margito Mendez, both of 550 Market street, that Arroyo had done the shooting. Arroyo was arrested 15 minutes after the battle.
The Mexican told the police that he and Martinez had been playing cards in a saloon at 548 Market street, but that Martinez had got up and left the game. He returned shortly after and bought a bottle of beer and started to leave. Arroyo was leaving at the same time and together they walked to the street, where Martinez said, according to Arroyo, that the other card players had been laughing at him during the game. Arroyo denied this but he said Martinez whipped out a knife and stabbed him in the leg.
Arroyo told the police he started to run for his home, but that Martinez followed shouting that he would kill him. Finally, as Martinez closed in on him, Arroyo said he shot at Martinez’s legs but missed, and when Martinez lunged at him, he shot three times more and then ran.
Police learned that Martinez and Arroyo had had trouble before, and that they had frequently had heated arguments but continued to appear on friendly terms.
Arroyo will be given a preliminary hearing in the police court after the inquest which will be held late today.
 

(16) Arroyo absolved on shooting case, Waukegan news-sun, Tuesday April 18, 1933,p1
 

Arroyo absolved on shooting case

Augustin Arroyo of south county street, charged with the murder of Frank Martinez in a Market street brawl Saturday night was absolved of blame for the killing by a coroner’s jury which acted under Dr. john L Taylor at the Holland morgue.

The jury found that Arroyo shot Martinez to death in self defense.
State’s attorney Charles E Mason instructed the police to hold Arroyo as a “material witness” despite the action of the coroner’s jury, but when the state’s attorney was reached at his home shortly after noon today, he said that he planned no action against Arroyo but so far had not informed the police and the Mexican was still being held in jail.

(17) Negro sought for shooting, The Waukegan News-Sun, Monday January 23 1933, p1

Negro sought for shooting

John Duncan shoots Hansome Oates in fight over Duncan’s common-law wife

A police search is under way in all cities between Milwaukee and Chicago for john Duncan, 42, colored, of Market street who is wanted for shooting Hansome Oates, 42, and colored of 513 Market street in a battle over Duncan’s common-law wife, Annabelle Thomas.
Oates is in the county hospital with a bullet in his head and one in his chest, but his condition is not regarded as serious. Oates believes that Duncan also was wounded in the fight.
The story, as told by Oates and Annabelle was that Annabelle was visiting with Oates in his room at 513 Market street yesterday afternoon when Duncan traced her and pounded on Oates’ door. Hansome finally agreed to let him in if he would not beat up Annabelle, but when Duncan got in he was carrying a gun and he immediately seized a coal shovel and started beating the woman over the head with it.
Oates tried to protect her and they grappled, the fight moving into the back yard where Duncan’s gun was discharged several times, Oates finally giving up the battle when he was shot in the chest. Duncan fled through the rail yards.
Oates was taken to Victory Memorial hospital and later was removed to the county hospital.
Fingerprints and police pictures of Duncan, who has been arrested before, have been broadcast to all police stations in this district.

 

(18) Slain bond quarrel; cousin seized as killer Chicago Tribune, Sun, May 6, 1945, p 22

Slain bond quarrel

James Hill, 38, of 585 Market Street, Waukegan was shot to death last night in a quarrel over ownership of a $25 war bond with his cousin, Luciius Ware, 32 of 673 Kennard Street, Waukegan, at Sheridan Road near Genesee Street in the suburb. Both are Negroes.

 

(19) Held in killing of cousin Chicago Tribune, Sun, May 6, 1945, p 6

Held in killing of cousin

George Ware, 32, Negro of 673 Kennard Street Waukegan, was held by Waukegan police yesterday for the fatal shooting of his cousin, James Hill, 38, or 585 Market Street, Waukegan in front of the Lake Breeze refreshment stand.

 

(20)  Indict Waukegan man for slaying over $5 Chicago Tribune, Tue Sept 15, 1953, p36

Indict Waukegan man for slaying over $5

The Lake county grand jury yesterday returned a murder indictment against Archie Huley, 39, Negro, of 585 Market st Waukegan. He was charged with the fatal shooting Aug 1 of Joseph Thomas, 41, Negro, of 712 Clinton st Waukegan in an argument over $5 and a package of cigarettes after a drinking bout.

 

(21) Ask grand Jury quiz in death old navy dental aid Chicago Tribune, Wed Nov 7, 1951, p26

Ask grand Jury quiz in death old navy dental aid

A Lake county coroner's jury recommended yesterday that Willie Harrell, 54, Negro, of 561 Market Street, Waukegan be held to the grand jury in the slaying of Ronald C Hamilton, 25 of Cleveland, a navy dental technician. Hamilton was shot Oct 25 outside Harrell's residence.

Harrell refused to testify because his attorney, Euclid Taylor of Chicago was not at the inquest. Harrell previously had said he fired when he saw Hamilton descending from a porch roof at the apartment where Harrell lived.
Earl Hamilton, father of the slain man, testified his son never had been in trouble and was engaged to be married next June. Lt John C Roe of a navy investigating board at Great Lakes Naval Training center said Hamilton's moral character was above average and his honesty and integrity above reproach.

 

(22)  Marine killed after forcing way into flat, Chicago Tribune, Fri Sept 16, 1955, p58

Marine killed after forcing way into flat

Marine SSgt Robert A Martens, 22, of Anthon, Ia, was shot and killed early yesterday by Lewis Williams, 40, after he had broken into the second floor apartment of Miss Lexie Huston, 48, at 430 Market st, Waukegan. Williams is a roomer there. Martens was in civilian clothing.

Police released Williams and Miss Huston on bonds of $1,000 each as material witnesses, but filed no charges against them. They said a rear porch screen door was pulled from its frame and a glass panel on an inner door smashed, apparently by Martens, as he was breaking in.
Williams said he was summoned by the screams of Miss Huston and fired three shots at Martens. Martens, who  was the son of Mr. and Mrs. Henry C Martens, enlisted in the marines Nov 19, 1952 and had been at  Great Lakes Naval Training center only since Sept 9 awaiting his discharge Nov 9. He had seen duty in the far east and was last assigned to the marine air wing of the fleet marine force at San Francisco.

 
(23) Waukegan janitor gets 25 years for murder Chicago Tribune, Tues Jan 19, 1954, p28

Waukegan janitor gets 25 years for murder

George Washington, 46 of 610 Market Street, Waukegan, school janitor, pleaded guilty to the murder last July 18 of Ezell Mitchell, 51 of 1329 Commonwealth Avenue, North Chicago. Circuit Judge Bernard M Decker sentenced him to 25 years in the penitentiary. The slaying occurred in front of Washington's home after he alleged his divorced wife Ernestine with whom he was still living, had gone out with Mitchell.

 

(24)    Woman, 28, held in killing of Waukegan man Chicago Tribine, Mon Feb 1, 1965

Woman, 28, held in killing of Waukegan man

Elizabeth Mims, 29 of 2217 Depster st Evenston was held yesterday by Waukegan police in the fatal shooting of Samuel Hicks, 40 of 514 Market street Waukegan.

Hicks was killed Saturday night in Viera’s tavern at 540 Market st Waukegan. Miss Mims told police she shot Hicks after he slashed her with a knife.
She was treated for cuts on the neck in St Therese hospital

 
(25)   Order woman back to cell as murderer, Chicago Tribune, Tues July 25, 1961, p 14

Order woman back to cell as murderer

Mrs Addie DeVost, 45, was ordered yesterday to return to the woman's reformatory at Dwight to finish a life sentance for murder.

Judge William M Carroll ruled against her appeal in Lake county circuit court that she was insane when she slew Samuel Conner, 40, on May 23, 1960, and that she was still insane when she confessed that she had piunded him to death with a hammer in the room they shared at 205 Market st, Waukegan.
She had been aquited in 1953 after the death of Arthur DeVost, 44, who had been chopped with an ax, and aquited in 1956 after the death of James Rice, 66, who was killed by a shotgun blast while living with Mrs DeVost. She has been returned to the lake county jail pending hearing on her appeal.

 

(26)  Widow, 44 gets life in prison for 3rd killing, Chicago Tribune, Tue Oct 25, 1960, p35

Widow, 44 gets life in prison for 3rd killing

Mrs. Addie deVosp, 44 of 205 Market st Waukegan, who had won acquittal in the killing of two husbands, was sentaned to life imprisonment yesterday for the hammer slaying May 23 of a third, Samuel Conner, 40, her common-law mate.

She changed her plea to guilty after selection of a jury began in Lake county circuit court in Waukegan. Before passing snetance Judge William M Carroll allowed a statement by Mrs DeVosp to be put in evidence. She gave the stattemtn to Bruno W Stanezak, Lake county state's attorney, revealing that she struck Conner with the hammer when she heard voices telling her to hit him.
She was aquited in 1953 after killing Arthur DeVosp, 44. In 1956, a jury turned her free the the fatal shooting of James rice, 66, her common-law husband. In both cases she pleaded self-defense.

 

(27)  Insane Waukegan Father Chokes His Son To Death , Chicago Tribune, Oct 21, 1908

Insane Waukegan Father Chokes His Son To Death

Foreman Who Tries to Save Four Tear Old Peter Blomstrom Jr. Rescued by Police and Neighbors
Peter Blomstrom, a. laborer employed by the American Steel and Wire company, at Waukegan, strangled his 4 year old son. Peter Jr., to death yesterday afternoon during a fit of insanity. Blomstrom complained to his wlfe in the morning that he felt ill, and would remain at home. Mrs. Biomstrom then took her 5 year old daughter and went to visit a neighbor. John Hall, a foreman at the steel and Wire company, was passing the Blomstrom house when he heard cries. He opened the door and found Blomstrom choking the child. “I’ll kill you, too!” shouted the maniac, leaping upon Hall. In the struggle which ensued Hall was baly bruised. Neighbors and police came to Hall’s rescue. When they arrived it was found that the little boy was dead. Blomstrom was taken to jail after a struggle. The coroner of Lake County will hold an inquest today. Mrs Blomstrom was overcome with grief when notified of the tragedy.”

 

(28) He’s catching up with liberty, St Louis Post-Dispatch, St Louis, Missouri, Sun, Sept 11, 1949, p119

He’s catching up with liberty,

Negro, freed after serving 26 years for a crime he did not commit, isn’t bitter over the wrong done him—told Lord he didn’t belong in prison

By Al Weisman, special correspondent of the Post-Dispatch
Chicago, Sept 10

James Montgomery, a big, husky, taciturn, middle-aged negro is busy these days “catching up with liberty”

He is up at dawn every morning and goes to sleep around midnight. In between he eats whatever he pleases, whenever he pleases.
He sits fo hours with an ailing wife, talking over old times. He takes long walks through parks or through the loop, staring at the big buildings. He drops into a neighborhood tavern for a beer and a look at this new-fangled television.
In general he is enjoying the thing most of us are accustomed to as normal day-to day events. Grinning, he says, “Just got lotta catching up to do, that’s all.”
Montgomery’s attitude today is somewhat like that of a newly-arrived immigrant, or a refugee from e European concentration camp. Montgomery is neither. He is a native American who has spent all his 56 years in this country.
But the horrifying fact is that Montgomery spent nearly 26 of those 56 years behind bars in a state prison for, it now develops, a crime he never committed.
He has been the victim of oppression more nearly resembling life in Nazi Germany than in these United states. Incredible as it may appear in freedom-loving America, Montgomery had been “railroaded” to prison for life on a false rape charge and had been allowed to remain there for more than a quarter of a century by an indifferent community. He may have remained in prison for the rest of his life had it not been for an attorney who became interested in the case two years ago.
Federal judge Michael J Igoe, in releasing Montgomery last month on a writ of habeas corpus, tried judicially to right the 26 year old wrong. In a blistering 18 page decision, Judge Igoe took cognizance of the terroristic role played in the case by the Ku Klux Klan when he said that Montgomery’s trial was a “sham, one of false pretenses, of fraud, and that the issue at the trial was not the guilt or innocence of the crime of rape—but that of racial subjugation.”
The state of Illinois, through its attorney general’s office, rather weakly defended itself, since most of the principals in the case are dead. Later, the state decided not even to appeal Judge Igoe’s decision because, as Assistant attorney general W Joe Hill said, testimony on disputed points would be based mainly on hearsay.
Thus, for the time being, ends a sordid and shocking chapter in this state’s judicial history—a chapter that had its shameful beginning in the last days of 1923, at the same time that the Ku Klux Klan was riding high in the Midwest, staging demonstrations and parades almost every night in the area around Waukegan ill, just north of Chicago.
Montgomery was operating a poolroom in Waukegan then and lived modestly with his wife Senturia.  He was 30, she was 18. Then, says Montgomery today, one night the “booze squad” of the lake county sheriff’s police, in search of a beer flat, raided his home. Montgomery says he learned the warrant for the raid had been issued for a house a block away, so he filed suit against the state authorities for trespassing and gained a $125 judgment.
This was one of the most costly judgments ever won by a plaintiff in an American court.
For, as Montgomery later related, the day he won the judgment, A V Smith, then state’s attorney for Lake county and who had top pay part of the $125 judgment, threatened to get him.
A few nights later Montgomery was aroused from his sleep and taken to jail. There, the bewildered man learned he had been charged with raping Miss Mamie Snow, a 62 year old notions peddler. At the time, Montgomery, a world war I veteran had never been arrested before.
Judge Igoe points out in his decision that Miss Snow picked Montgomery out of a group of negroes as her assailant but the next day couldn’t identify him. Miss Snow was later placed in a metal institution, where she died in 1937.
Commenting on Miss Snow’s credibility as a witness, Judge Igoe had this to say: “the testimony of such a witness in any field of litigation should be of little credence, yet without her testimony the case against Montgomery would hae collapsed had the prosecuting attorney exercised the degree of impartiality and fairness which is his sworn duty in the rendition of true justice.”
The wheels of injustice at this point began to grind swiftly and cruelly. “the methods employed by the prosecution were shocking,” said judge Igoe.
Montgomery tried to get out on bond, but was told by Chief Thomas Kennedy, now dead, but then head of the sheriff’s police” “if you did this in Georgia or where you come from we would turn you over to the KKK. We’re liable to do that now and you know what would happen.”
Montgomery, who knew all too well what would have happened had he gained his freedom in those days of flaming crosses, elected to drop his fight for bond.
In the meantime, Miss Snow had been given an examination at Victory Memorial Hospital in Waukegan by Dr, John E Walter. His report disclosed that Miss Snow had not been raped, had suffered some facial contusions.
But a state’s attorney who, in the scathing words of judge Igoe, “dominated the entire proceedings,” suppressed the doctor’s report.
Dr. Walter, the only principal except Montgomery still living, asked during the habeas corpus hearing why he hadn’t called the true contents of his report to the attention of the prosecutor, replied” “you didn’t know our prosecutor at the time. He was very determined. He wanted his way or there would be trouble. I’m not a fellow who looks for trouble.”
According to Montgomery, the frame-up was completed when his court-appointed attorney, fearing personal reprisals, failed to place witnesses on the stand who could support the defendant’s alibi.
A jury found Montgomery guilty of the rape charges and he was sentenced to life imprisonment on January 25, 1924; after a fast one-day trial. One week later a man who had never before been in trouble and had no idea how he had ever gotten into such a mess as this, was in Statesville penitentiary, Number 8959.
In Statesville, Montgomery became, in the words of warden James Ragen, a model prisoner. He met Nathan Leopold, the brilliant student who  with ”Dickie” Loab had killed young Bobby franks in a “thrill slaying.”
Leoplold, as he has with other prisoners, taught Montgomery how to read and write and loaned him books from his private library. Thus armed, Montgomery began to bombard the parole board with petitions for his release but he was turned down each time. It seemed state’s attorney smith, not content with the conviction and life sentence, had written a  letter to the parole board saying Lake county authorities were opposed to Montgomery every being released from prison.
This letter was always on file. None of Smith’s successors, except one, ever did anything about withdrawing it. Dr. Walter never came forward to offer the report that would free Montgomery. No one seemed to care.
Then one day in 1947, Luis Kutner, Chicago lawyer, was chatting with some clients in Statesville when one of them told him, “Lu, there’s a guy here who is innocent. His name is Montgomery. He was framed.”
Kutner said he asked to see Montgomery and he recalls the negroes first words were “Mister, I don’t belong here.
The lawyer, impressed with Montgomery’s story, began a painstaking investigation, in the course of which he unearthed dr. Walter’s report on file at the hospital.
Kutner estimated he and his aides put in a total of 3000 man hours and spent about $4200 of his own money to substantiate Montgomery’s story. The result was a petition for release. This was rejected. Then  followed a plea to the state supreme court, which was also turned down.
In the meantime, Lake county state’s attorney Harry A Hall, relaxing the error that had been made, withdrew that antagonizing letter which had been on file with the parole board. Kutner’s next step was to file his habeas corpus petition in the United States district court here.
On August 10, his 56^th birthday, Montgomery was brought into the federal court here from Statesville. After some brief arguments in which the state, as judge Igoe took care to point out, offered no contradictory evidence, the judge delivered his decision, releasing Montgomery.
For the first time the grim Montgomery broke into a smile. As he walked out a free man, his prison guards handed him $10, the usual sum given to released prisoners. “Ten dollars for 26 years,” said Montgomery, laconically.
The released prisoner posed on the steps of the courthouse with his lawyer. He recognized a few loop buildings but didn’t recognize taxicabs as such.
With a brother-in-law, he stopped in a restaurant for a corned beef sandwich and some milk. Then they got into an automobile and began the 35-mile drive to Waukegan, where Montgomery’s wife lived with relatives. The car drove at a speed of 70 miles per hour, but Montgomery said later it felt like 35 to him.
The ex-prisoner trotted into a neat frame duplex and to the bedside of Senturia, his wife, now ill with diabetes. As he leaned over the bed and kissed her, she asked:
“How’s it feel to be home, Jim?”
“Feels better than prison, girl.” Replied Montgomery.
Montgomery later sat down to a plate of fried chicken and some beer and then began a slow and calculated campaign to “catch up with liberty,” as he puts it.
What impresses him most about life in the area as compared to 26 years ago?
“Everything,” he grins. “The girls dresses seem shorter. Some of the buildings down in the loop seem dirtier then when I went in. They sure have built up the highways around these parts. This television is something, eh?”
Montgomery is a skilled machinist but says he’s in no hurry to get back to work and that relatives will help him out temporarily. He says he doesn’t feel any bitterness toward anyone, “just glad to get out.”
But understandably, he doesn’t want to live in Waukegan. He’s thinking of moving to Michigan.
In the meantime, Kutner is preparing to seek recompense for Montgomery from the state of Illinois.
“It’s impossible to measure 26 years of a man’s life in dollars, but our talking figure right now is $100,000,” says Kutner, confidently. Kutner says Gov. Adlai Stevenson could authorize recompense from a contingency fund; or a claim may be filed against the state court of claims or, as a last resort, a bill could be introduced into the state legislature in 1951.
Kutner and Montgomery are confident of collecting quite a sum, so much so they intend to keep the $10 given the prisoner by the guards as a symbol.
Altogether, Montgomery has received $1250 from people all over the country with sympathetic notes. Instead of using this sum for himself, Montgomery decided, after urging by Kutner, to set up the James Montgomery Foundation, the purpose of which, according to the lawyer, is “to help assure the survival of human rights.” Specifically, it will investigate and help people like Montgomery. Kutner says he already is studying six other cases.
“Yep, I think everything is going to be all right,” says Montgomery. “I ain’t holding no grudge. I’m living for the first time in years.
“Every morning I got up I kept saying ‘Lord, I don’t belong here.’ Took him a long time, but he finally got around to me.

 

(29)  86 F. Supp. 382 (1949) UNITED STATES ex rel. MONTGOMERY v. RAGEN.No. 48 C 1564.

United States District Court N. D. Illinois, E. D.

August 10, 1949.

*383 Luis Kutner, Chicago, Illinois, for relator James Montgomery.

Ivan A. Elliott, Attorney General of the State of Illinois, and Raymond Thiesse, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.
IGOE, District Judge.
This is a habeas corpus action brought by James Montgomery, relator herein, against Joseph E. Ragan, Warden of the Illinois State Penitentiary, Joliet, Illinois, respondent, to test the legality of his custody arising out of a judgment for conviction for the crime of rape by virtue of a true bill returned in The Circuit Court of Lake County, State of Illinois, filed January 2, 1924.
On October 26, 1948, the relator petitioned this court for writ of habeas corpus and in his prayer, amongst other things, requested the assignment of attorney Luis Kutner of Chicago, Illinois, as his counsel. Said counsel was appointed pursuant to order of court as amicus curiae.
Shortly after the filing of this petition and after notice to respondent, the respondent filed a motion to dismiss the petition and to deny the issuance of the writ of habeas corpus. Though the respondent attempted to descend to particulars in his motion to dismiss, it is in effect a general motion to dismiss and therefore by the very nature of the motion the respondent admitted the allegations well pleaded to be true. House v. Mayo, 324 U.S. 42, 65 S. Ct. 517, 89 L. Ed. 739; Williams v. Kaiser, 323 U.S. 471, 65 S. Ct. 363, 89 LEd. 398; White v. Ragen, 324 U.S. 760, 65 S. Ct. 978, 89 L. Ed. 1348. The petition was clearly sufficient on its face and after hearing and argument thereon the court entered an order on February 25, 1949, denying respondent's motion to dismiss and issued a writ of habeas corpus directed to the respondent. The respondent filed a return to the writ of habeas corpus, joining issue, and the matter was set for hearing which was had on June 27, 1949.
The petition having been filed in this court October 26, 1948, the court proceeded to hear and determine the matter in conformity with the new Federal Judicial Code, Title 28 U.S.C.A. "Judiciary and Judicial Procedure" approved June 25, 1948, effective September 1, 1948. The pertinent sections in the new code are an amplification under the prior Title 28 U.S.C.A. § 461 which provides: "The court, or justice, or judge shall proceed in a summary way to determine the facts of the case, by hearing the testimony and arguments, and thereupon to dispose of the party as law and justice require."
The new code relating to habeas corpus is designed to minimize the rigid formality and is the liberal reflection of the Federal Judiciary in permitting those persons who contend they are illegally detained, to have their day in court.
The within matter was heard and determined pursuant to the new code, Chapter 153 titled Habeas Corpus, Sections 2241, Power to Grant Writ: 2242, Application: 2243, Issuance of Writ: Return: Hearing: Decision: 2246 relating to Evidence: Depositions: Affidavits: 2247 relating to Documentary Evidence: 2248 relating to Return or Answer: Conclusiveness: 2249 relating to Certified Copies of Indictment: Plea and Judgment: Duty of Respondent.

The petitioner was permitted to sue in forma pauperis.

In essence Montgomery's verified petition alleges his indictment, sentence and *384 conviction, and that he has exhausted all available State remedies and writ of error is not available because the statutory period of limitations of twenty years has expired. People v. Chapman, 392 Ill. 168, 64 N.E.2d 529. Coram Nobis is not available inasmuch as the statutory period of limitations of five years has also expired. Hall v. People, 402 Ill. 478, 84 N.E.2d 418. Habeas corpus was filed in the Trial Court, namely, The Circuit Court of Lake County, State of Illinois, and was denied August 21, 1948, without opinion; certiorari was sought in the Supreme Court of the United States to review the denial of the habeas corpus proceedings and that was denied October 11, 1948, without opinion. 335 U.S. 836, 69 S. Ct. 28.
Montgomery further alleges that having exhausted all available State remedies he is remediless and a Federal Court should entertain this petition. Ex parte Davis, 318 U.S. 412, 63 S. Ct. 679, 87 L. Ed. 868; Ex parte Hawk, 321 U.S. 114, 64 S. Ct. 448, 88 L. Ed. 572; United States ex rel. Rooney v. Ragen, 7 Cir., 158 F.2d 346; United States ex rel. Mills v. Ragen, D.C., 77 F. Supp. 15; Washington v. Smyth, 4 Cir., 167 F.2d 658.
Though not alleged in the petition the record discloses that he also filed application for executive clemency praying for a pardon on or about October 1, 1947, which was subsequently denied.
The petition relies essentially upon matters de hors the record; namely, a hospital record and report of findings by Dr. John E. Walter, showing that Miss Snow was not raped, which record is in exact conformance with the hospital chart in the files of the Victory Memorial Hospital of Waukegan, Illinois. As various exhibits, he attaches a copy of the hospital record, an affidavit from Dr. John E. Walter in support of the hospital chart findings, and other documentary exhibits presenting a "totality of facts", Betts v. Brady, 316 U.S. 455, 62 S. Ct. 1252, 1256, 86 L. Ed. 1595.

He contends briefly as follows

1. The crime of rape was not committed against the person of Miss Mamie Snow on November 15, 1923, as charged in Cause No. 13722;
2. That he was unjustly and unlawfully indicted, convicted and sentenced for an alleged crime, which never occurred;
3. That the prosecuting authorities suppressed the evidence of Dr. Walter's physical examination of Miss Mamie Snow, which certainly would have proved that the crime of rape was never committed upon the person of Miss Mamie Snow, on November 15, 1923;
4. That petitioner did not know of the existence of the Hospital Chart and of Dr. Walter's examination and findings at the time of trial;
5. That petitioner was unaware and ignorant of the fact that Dr. Walter could or should have been called upon to testify at the trial as to the examination and findings he made upon the person of Miss Mamie Snow on November 15, 1923;
6. That petitioner's trial took place in the heyday of the Ku Klux Klan, and that he verily believes many Klansmen attended the trial of said cause, and that his attorney was either afraid or totally incompetent to properly represent him at the trial;
7. That his trial was a mere sham and pretense, and only a means of depriving him of his liberty without due process of law;
8. That he is not guilty of the alleged crime of rape upon the person of Miss Mamie Snow;
9. That he has not been guilty of negligence or delay in bringing these facts before the Court, having only of recent date been informed as to the existence of the Hospital Chart and Dr. Walter's Affidavit, which proof substantiates his claim of innocence of the alleged crime of rape, and a denial of due process of law;
10. That his conviction should not be suffered to stand else he would be doomed to imprisonment for the duration of his natural life for an alleged crime which was never committed having already served over twenty-four (24) years, though being totally innocent, and would be left without any legal remedy, either in the State or the Federal Courts;
*385 11. That the entire affair was a "frame-up" and a hoax, concocted solely for the purpose of depriving petitioner of his rightful freedom and liberty.

Jurisdiction.

After a review of the allegations in support of the exhaustion of available State remedies and after hearing and arguments thereon, this court finds that a Federal question of substance is properly before the court and that the petitioner has properly invoked the protective cloak of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. St. Joseph Stock Yards Co. v. United States, 298 U.S. 38, 54, 56 S. Ct. 720, 80 L. Ed. 1033; Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103, 55 S. Ct. 340, 79 L. Ed. 791, 98 A.L.R. 406; White v. Ragen, 324 U.S. 760, 65 S. Ct. 978, 89 L. Ed. 1348; Ex parte Hawk, 321 U.S. 114, 64 S. Ct. 448, 88 L. Ed. 572; Washington v. Smyth, 4 Cir., 167 F.2d 658.

Evidence Adduced at the Hearing.

Dr. J. E. Walter who was the attending physician at the Victory Memorial Hospital at the time of the alleged offense testified that on November 15, 1923, he was called to the Hospital to examine Miss Mamie Snow, a white person. Miss Snow claimed that she had earlier been attacked and raped. Dr. Walter gave Miss Snow a thorough examination and discovered contusions about the head but otherwise no signs pointing to rape. Under questioning by Mr. Kutner, attorney for the relator, he testified:
"Q. At the time you first saw her on that date, did you observe her clothing. A. Yes Sir.
"Q. Was it disarrayed in any way? A. No, it was not.
"Q. You just observed some contusions, would you say? A. On the neck and face.
"Q. Did you examine her for evidence of rape? A. I did, yes.
"Q. Did you find any? A. I found no evidence at all of any rape.
"Q. You made a report of that?[1] A. Yes.
"Q. And your report, to your knowledge, was communicated to the police, is that right? A. Yes."
Dr. Walter also testified that from his examination of Miss Snow, he determined that she had been and remained a virgin. He further stated that he and his wife had known Miss Snow for a year or two prior to November 15, 1923, as she had been a door to door peddler of notions, needles, and thread, and had called at his home from time to time. During these visits, Miss Snow would engage Dr. and Mrs. Walter in conversations of a highly irrelevant nature and the Doctor had noticed peculiarities about her speech and manner leading him to believe that she was mentally irresponsible; nevertheless, she appeared harmless and the Doctor and his wife often made purchases from her.
He further testified upon re-direct examination that he was available at the time of Montgomery's trial but was not called as a witness.
*386 James Montgomery, a colored person, the relator herein, testified that at the time of his arrest on November 15, 1923, he could neither read nor write, had been married for three years, had served fourteen months in the army, and had never been in difficulty with the police.
He further testified that while at the police station, following his arrest, he was assaulted by the police, which beating left scars on his face and forehead visible to the present day. The morning after his arrest, he was presented to Mamie Snow, who was asked, "Did you see this fellow before?" Miss Snow answered, "I never saw this fellow before in my life."
That at a preliminary hearing requested by him to give bond, the States Attorney warned Montgomery away from such efforts by saying, "If you were down in Georgia or Mississippi where you come from, we would turn you over to the Ku Klux Klan and we are liable to do it up here now, you know I am a member of that organization." This was sufficient persuasion to the relator not to attempt to make bond and he was returned to his cell to await further developments.
He further testified that his attorney was frightened, and though twelve persons were able to testify that he had been far from the scene of the alleged crime, and repeatedly asked to have them brought in, his attorney, submissive to the threats of the States Attorney, refused to bring them in. The States Attorney went so far as to threaten Montgomery with prompt action by the Klan if he took the stand in his own behalf. He further testified on cross-examination that his trial lasted twenty minutes.
From the foregoing evidence it can be reasonably inferred that the States Attorney and his agents were well aware of the examination of Mamie Snow by Dr. Walter, his medical conclusions, and report thereof, but either because of gross dereliction of duty or wrongful suppression of such evidence by the prosecution, James Montgomery was convicted of a crime never committed and sentenced to life imprisonment in the State Penitentiary.
Exhibit 2. which is a transcript of the common law record in the original trial was admitted into evidence.
The court was singularly impressed with Exhibit 3. which was received in evidence, to wit:

"Affidavit of Court Reporter

"Bert McDermott, being first duly sworn upon oath deposes and says, that he is the Official Court Reporter of the Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois, and was the Court Reporter in the case of The People of the State of Illinois vs James Montgomery, General No. 13722, in the Circuit Court of Lake County, Illinois; that he has made diligent search among his official files for the stenographic report of the proceedings upon the hearing of said cause but has not been able to locate the same; that his stenographic report of the evidence, either oral or documentary, that was introduced upon the trial of said cause are missing from his custody and cannot be found."
The respondent offered no evidence in defense or in resistance to the writ of habeas corpus, nor to the oral and documentary evidence adduced.
Rape is looked upon by all mankind as one of the most infamous and dastardly of crimes known to the law. A defendant charged with such a crime carries a heavy burden. If colored, his burden becomes more acute and more aggravating, especially where the charge is made by a white prosecutrix. Unfortunately, we have not progressed far enough in our path toward the civilized standards which places the colored man on equal footing with that of the white man. Social offenses are committed against the Negro by methods of segregation, ostracism, and other subterfuges all designed to deprive him, though he be a native born citizen of the United States, from the just rights and protective cloaks guaranteed to him by the Constitution of the United States.
In the case at bar, at the time of the conviction, we have the unblemished record of James Montgomery, 26 years old, a law abiding property owner, married and a respected member of his community. We *387 have evidence that he served his country in World War I. We have also in the record which is uncontradicted the background of the intense hatreds, fomented and localized at the time of the alleged offense, in Lake County in which North Chicago and Waukegan are situated. The respondent has brought nothing forward to defend against the charges made in the verified petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by the relator. If there was a shred of evidence to contradict and defend against the relator's charges, sufficient time was afforded to the respondent to bring forward and present evidence in defense of the accusations made.
We have the uncontradicted evidence that the prosecuting witness was a person of irresponsible mentality and was later confined to a mental institution where she died. The testimony of such a prosecuting witness in any field of litigation should be of little credence; yet without her testimony the case against James Montgomery would have collapsed and should have collapsed had the prosecuting attorney exercised the degree of impartiality and fairness which is his own sworn duty in the rendition of true justice. It is his duty to bring forward all facts to the Court's and jury's attention so that a true consideration may be made in the interest of justice.
A prosecutor is supposed to be an impartial representative of public justice. The methods employed by the prosecution at Lake County in 1924 represents as shocking a situation as ever before presented before this court. A society cannot suppress lawlessness by an accused through the means of lawlessness of the prosecution. A society cannot inspire respect for the law by withholding its protection from those accused of crimes. It was and is the prosecuting attorney's duty to assist in giving a fair trial to a defendant. Read v. United States, 8 Cir., 42 F.2d 636; Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 55 S. Ct. 629, 79 L. Ed. 1314. A prosecutor must, to be fair, not only use the evidence against the criminal, but must not willingly ignore that which is in an accused's favor. It is repugnant to the concept of due process that a prosecutor introduce everything in his favor and ignore anything which may excuse the accused for the crime with which he is charged. It is manifest in this matter that some one identified with the prosecution, as the circumstances indicate very clearly, ignored a material piece of evidence which, if it had been brought to the attention of the jury or the trial judge, would certainly have resulted in the acquittal of this relator. There is evidence in the record sufficiently to indicate that circumstantial vital evidence was brought to or available for the prosecution. The prosecution is charged with the knowledge of what was contained in the certificate of findings by Dr. John E. Walter. The respondent conceded the authenticity of the hospital record. Presenting the obverse, another Judge has said "Though unfair means may happen to result in doing justice to the prisoner in the particular case, yet, justice so attained is unjust and dangerous to the whole community." Hurd v. People, 25 Mich. 405.
To condone the methods evident in this case, is to invite grave injustice. There is one way to stop a practice that has become altogether too common and that is to bring it to a conscious level where the public can scrutinize it and take such steps as are necessary to insure a true rendition of justice to all, regardless of race, color or creed.
The relator, James Montgomery, has gone the merry-go-round of Illinois justice and has failed to get a hearing, or even a suggestion of a hearing on the serious charges he has made. His conviction was secured by the use of false testimony, fraud, and suppression of vital evidence which are a denial of due process, and a direct violation of the Fourteenth Amendment. Shelley v. Kramer, 334 U.S. 1, 68 S. Ct. 836, 92 L. Ed. 1161, 3 A.L.R.2d 441; Brown v. Mississippi, 297 U.S. 278, 56 S. Ct. 461, 80 L. Ed. 682; Palko v. Connecticut, 302 U.S. 319, 58 S. Ct. 149, 82 L. Ed. 288; Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103, 55 S. Ct. 340, 79 L. Ed. 791, 98 A.L.R. 406.
There was no trial here, but a sham, one of false pretenses and fraud. The Law is established that habeas corpus *388 lies in a case where a conviction has been in disregard of the Constitutional Rights of the accused and where the writ is the sole effective means of protecting his rights. Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103, 55 S. Ct. 340, 79 L. Ed. 791, 98 A.L.R. 406; Hysler v. Florida, 315 U.S. 411, 316 U.S. 642; 62 S. Ct. 688, 86 L. Ed. 932; United States ex rel. Lesser v. Hunt, 2 Cir., 117 F.2d 30; House v. Mayo, 324 U.S. 42, 65 S. Ct. 517, 89 L. Ed. 739.
The due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment embraces the re-requirement that no trial should deprive a defendant of the constitutional safeguards which are of fundamental importance, and a necessary part of a "fair trial". The unjustified and illegal punishment of James Montgomery is a clear demonstration of violence to the American concept of due process of law.
The relator has invoked the primary and irresistible strength of the writ of habeas corpus. The writ has long been the sword and shield in the long struggle for freedom and constitutional government. It is a potent weapon against tyranny in every form and guise. It is the weapon against tyranny of the ruling majority who are heedless of the justice and rights of minorities. It is the bulwark of a citizen against suppressed evidence that tends to give justice elusive qualities that become illogical and dangerous attacks on the fundamental principle of our democracy. It brings to book those who display scornful reference to human rights.
That the relator, James Montgomery, properly invokes the due process clause of the United States Constitution, it is clearly sustained by the evidence. Due process, in short, means fair play. Due process of law is that process of impartial law which is binding because it is right. It senses the mistakes of the past and wants to rectify them. It provides men with faith. As stated in People v. Bimbo, 314 Ill. 449, 454, 145 N.E. 651, 653. "A defendant charged with crime has a right to a fair and impartial trial according to law, and the law does not provide one method for trying innocent persons and another for trying guilty persons, as all persons charged with crime are presumed to be innocent until they are proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt according to the established methods of procedure. People v. Gardiner, 303 Ill. 204, 135 N.E. 422; People v. Newman, 261 Ill. 11, 103 N.E. 589. The state's attorney is a sworn officer of the court, and it is his official duty to see that the defendant has such fair and impartial trial. While errors are sometimes committed by counsel through eagerness to win a lawsuit, yet there is nothing in the duty of a state's attorney which requires him to prejudice the right of a defendant to a fair trial in an eagerness to secure a conviction. People v. Sorrells, 293 Ill. 591, 127 N.E. 651." (Emphasis supplied.)
Due process also identifies itself with due course of justice, and that phrase "means not only the due conviction and punishment, or the due acquittal and discharge, of an accused person as justice may require, but is also the due course of proceedings in the administration of justice. * * *" Shackelford v. Commonwealth, 185 Ky. 51, 214 S.W. 788, 789.
In Adamson v. People of California, 332 U.S. 46, 67 S. Ct. 1672, 1682, 91 L. Ed. 1903, 171 A.L.R. 1223, the Court, through Justice Frankfurter, stated:
"It may not be amiss to restate the pervasive function of the Fourteenth Amendment in exacting from the States observance of basic liberties. See Malinski v. New York, 324 U.S. 401, 412 et seq., 65 S. Ct. 781, 786, 89 L. Ed. 1029; State of Louisiana v. Resweber, 329 U.S. 459, 466, et seq., 67 S. Ct. 374, 377 [91 L. Ed. 422].
"The Amendment neither comprehends the specific provisions by which the founders deemed it appropriate to restrict the federal government nor is it confined to them. The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has an independent potency, precisely as does the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment in relation to the Federal Government. It ought not to require argument to reject the notion that due process of law meant one thing in the Fifth Amendment and another *389 in the Fourteenth. The Fifth Amendment specifically prohibits prosecution of an `infamous crime' except upon indictment; it forbids double jeopardy; it bars compelling a person to be a witness against himself in any criminal case; it precludes deprivation of `life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.' Are Madison and his contemporaries in the framing of the Bill of Rights to be charged with writing in a meaningless clause? To consider `due process of law' as merely a shorthand statement of other specific clauses in the same amendment is to attribute to the authors and proponents of this Amendment ignorance of, or indifference to, a historic conception which was one of the great instruments in the arsenal of constitutional freedom which the Bill of Rights was to protect and strengthen.
"A construction which gives to due process no independent function but turns it into a summary of the specific provisions of the Bill of Rights would, as has been noted, tear up by the roots much of the fabric of law in the several States, and would deprive the States of opportunity for reforms in legal process designed for extending the area of freedom. It would assume that no other abuses would reveal themselves in the course of time than those which had become manifest in 1791. Such a view not only disregards the historic meaning of `due process,' it leads inevitably to a warped construction of specific provisions of the Bill of Rights to bring within their scope conduct clearly condemned by due process but not easily fitting into the pigeon holes of the specific provisions. It seems pretty late in the day to suggest that a phrase so laden with historic meaning should be given an improvised content consisting of some but not all of the provisions of the first eight Amendments, selected on an undefined basis, with improvisation of content for the provisions so selected.
"And so, when, as in the case like the present, a conviction in a State court is here for review under a claim that a right protected by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment has been denied, the issue is not whether an infraction of one of the specific provisions of the first eight Amendments is disclosed by the record. The relevant question is whether the criminal proceedings which resulted in conviction deprived the accused of the due process of law to which the United States Constitution entitled him. Judicial review of that guaranty of the Fourteenth Amendment inescapably imposes upon this Court an exercise of judgment upon the whole course of the proceedings in order to ascertain whether they offend those canons of decency and fairness which express the notions of justice of English speaking peoples even toward those charged with the most heinous offenses. These standards of justice are not authoritatively formulated anywhere as though they were prescriptions in a pharmacopoeia."
In Lisenba v. California, 314 U.S. 219, 236, 62 S. Ct. 280, 290, 86 L. Ed. 166, the court defined denial of due process as "the failure to observe that fundamental fairness essential to the very concept of justice."
Even in a case where the perjury was unknown, as claimed by the prosecuting officers until some time after the trial, a federal court has determined that the conviction was in violation of the 14th Amendment and released the petitioner upon a writ of habeas corpus. In the case of Jones v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 97 F.2d 335, Judge Simons, speaking for the Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, said, at page 338: "The concept of due process as it has become crystallized in the public mind and by judicial pronouncement, is formulated in Mooney v. Holohan, 294 U.S. 103, 112, 55 S. Ct. 340, 341, 342, 79 L. Ed. 791, 98 A.L.R. 406. Its requirement in safe-guarding the liberty of the citizen against deprivation through the action of the state embodies those `fundamental conceptions of justice which lie at the base of our civil and political institutions,' referred to in Hebert v. Louisiana, 272 U.S. 312, 316, 317, 47 S. Ct. 103, 71 L. Ed. 270, 48 A.L.R. 1102. This requirement cannot be satisfied `By mere notice and hearing if a state has contrived a conviction through the pretense of a trial which in truth is but used as a means of depriving a defendant *390 of liberty through a deliberate deception of court and jury by the presentation of testimony known to be perjured. Such a contrivance by the state to procure the conviction and imprisonment of a defendant is as inconsistent with the rudimentary demands of justice as is the obtaining of a like result by intimidation.' If it be urged that the concept thus formulated but condemns convictions obtained by the state through testimony known by the prosecuting officers to have been perjured, then the answer must be that the delineated requirement of due process in the Mooney Case embraces no more than the facts of that case require, and that the `fundamental conceptions of justice which lie at the base of our civil and political institutions' must with equal abhorrence condemn as a travesty a conviction upon perjured testimony if later, but fortunately not too late, its falseness is discovered, and that the state in the one case as in the other is required to afford a corrective judicial process to remedy the alleged wrong, if constitutional rights are not to be impaired."
The Jones case was approved by the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in the recent case of Kelly v. Ragen, 129 F.2d 811, 814, wherein Judge Sparks, speaking for the court, said "A recent case which well illustrates the type of urgent necessity justifying the issuance of the writ is Jones v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 6 Cir., 97 F.2d 335, 336."
The facts in this case present a situation almost identical with that before the court in the case of Jones v. Commonwealth of Kentucky, 6 Cir., 97 F.2d 335. In both cases, petitioners were convicted and have served a substantial portion of their lives in the penitentiary. In both cases the perjury at the trial was first discovered by the convicted persons many years after the trial. In both cases the perjured testimony was vital to the prosecution's case. In both cases the petitioners had exhausted all of the legal remedies available to them under the laws of the State of their incarceration. In both cases the only remaining State avenue to correct the manifest injustice, pardon by the Governor, was closed. In the Jones case the perjury at the trial was not discovered until many years after the trial. In this case many facts convince me that some of the prosecuting officers knew at the time of the trial that Mamie Snow was committing perjury. In a case of this nature one would not expect to find direct proof of the connivance of the prosecution in the use of perjured testimony, and the circumstantial evidence presented is as strong as could reasonably be expected. However, even if this evidence of knowing use of perjured testimony was not in the case, I believe that even on the authority of the Jones case, this petitioner should be discharged.
The corruption of administrative processes set in motion forces which deprived relator of due process of law.
Corruption is an act of an official or fiduciary person who wrongfully acts contrary to duty and to the rights of others. State v. Shipman, 202 N.C. 518, 163 S.E. 657, 669. Its effect vitiates the basic integrity and purity negativing that which is vital to the due course of justice. State v. Marrero, 132 La. 109, 61 So. 136, 140, Ann.Cas.1914C, 783.

Conclusions of Fact.

That the conclusions of fact set forth in the foregoing are herewith adopted as final, and in addition thereto, the Court specifically further finds:
1. That Mamie Snow was not raped on November 15, 1923, by James Montgomery, or any other person;
2. That Dr. John E. Walter, by his examination of Mamie Snow on November 15, 1923, determined that she had not been raped;
3. That Dr. Walter made a written report of the examination in which he showed that Mamie Snow had not been raped;
4. That the prosecution either knew, or should have known, of Dr. Walter's examination and report in fact they are charged with the knowledge;
5. That in spite of this knowledge, the state authorities of Lake County, Waukegan, Illinois, brought a criminal action for rape against James Montgomery;
*391 6. That at the trial of the relator, the evidence of Dr. Walter's examination and report were wrongfully suppressed by the prosecution;
7. That the States Attorney by threats of intimidation prevented any witnesses from testifying in behalf of James Montgomery;
8. That Mamie Snow was mentally incompetent and her testimony at the trial of James Montgomery was totally false;
9. That the States Attorney knew, and was charged with the knowledge, that the testimony of Mamie Snow was false and yet wrongfully used her testimony to convict James Montgomery;
10. That the trial of James Montgomery was a sham in that
a. The States Attorney dominated the entire proceeding;
b. The States Attorney threatened retaliation by the Ku Klux Klan if the defendant or his counsel attempted to offer any defense;
c. The issue at the trial was not the guilt or innocence of the crime of rape but that of racial subjugation.
Conclusions Of Law.
That the conclusions of law set forth in the foregoing are herewith adopted as final, and in addition thereto the court specifically finds:
1. That the relator has now exhausted all remedies available to him in the Illinois Courts;
2. That this court has jurisdiction of the person and subject matter in that the relator has exhausted his state remedies and has alleged substantial violations of his federal rights;
3. That the wrongful suppression by the prosecution of evidence which unquestionably would have established the innocence of James Montgomery was a denial of due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution;
4. That the States Attorney by knowingly presenting false testimony to convict James Montgomery, did deny to him due process of law in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution;
5. That the unlawful sham purported to be a trial was a denial of due process in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution;
6. That because James Montgomery was denied due process of law as guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, his conviction and sentence thereunder are void and relator should be discharged;
7. That this case comes squarely within the rule of being tested and appraised by the totality of facts.
NOTES
[1] Relator's Exhibit No. 1. Copy of Victory Memorial Hospital Record of Miss Mamie Snow, No. 5441 11-15 Treatment Hot B. A. Sol. compress to left eye every three hours. Dr. Walter. Personal History 11-16-23 Dr. Walter. Final Diagnosis; Contusion over eyes and nose; mouth and throat. Chief complaint: Attacked by Negro. Physical Examination 11-16 Dr. Walter. Working Diagnosis: Contusion of face and throat. Physical Findings: Contusions. Bruises over eyes and nose. Lacerated mouth and throat. Copied from Hospital Chart 6-24-47 for Arthur C. McHenry, Attorney 4 South Genesee Street Waukegan, Illinois I certify that the above is a true and exact copy of the Hospital Chart on Miss Mamie Snow. /a/ U. Phillips Superintendent. clc Mary J. McMahon (Seal)

 
(30)   Man charged with assaulting aged woman gets stay, Libertyville independent, Oct 28, 1920, p6

Man charged with assaulting aged woman gets stay

Case of James Montgomery is continued; grand Jury to hear evidence

James Montgomery, Negro, charged with assaulting Mrs. Mary Rintz, aged 60, 14^th and Dugdale road, who was spirited to the county jail by the North Chicago police who feared an attempt to lynch him might be made, was arraigned before justice John Nelson late Saturday afternoon and his case continued until today.
The continuance was decided upon, it is declared, in order to give the state’s attorney James G Welch an opportunity to present the evidence before the special grand jury, which went into session today and was called by judge R K Welch of Rockland last week for the purpose of investigating charges of criminal libel against Wilbur Glenn Voliva, overseer of Zion, brought by the Rev. Thomas H Nelson, leader of the Independent faction and his followers.
Montgomery, it is charged, accosted Mrs. Rintz on the street in front of her home and after starting an argument compelled her to go into her house and then drew a butcher knife. According to the North Chicago police, the appearance of Mrs Rintz’ daughter upon the scene cause Montgomery to retreat and disappear into the nearby woods.
When arrested by the police, Mrs Rintz was positive that Montgomery is the person molested her, the police declared.

 

(31) A life sentence for negro who attacked old woman, Libertyville Independent, Thursday Jan 13, 1921

A life sentence for negro who attacked old woman

Scott Garner who made dastardly assault on old cripple, gets severest penalty

After a deliberation lasting five and one half hours a jury in circuit court brought in a verdict of guilt in the case against Scott Garner, the 16 year old negro who made a fiendish assault on Mrs John Mason, an eldely cripple in Zion City the latter part of last November. The verdict was returned about five-thirty o’clock thursday night.

When the jury retired to its jury room the impression prevailed in the courtn room that a verdict would be returned within half an hour at the outside. No stronger case had ever been presented to a jury in circuit court. Garner did not even take the stand to contradict any of the evidence.
Therefore, when hour after hour dragged by and the jury did not return a verdict there was a growing wonderment as to what was keeping them from arriving at an agreement.
It develops however that there was no question in the minds of the jurors with regards to wether or not the negro youth was guilty—that was agreed upon at once. The long argument grew out of te fact that two members of the jury were inclined to think that a life sentence was a little too severe. They were inclined to favor a term of years. The other ten jurors held out anfd finally won the others over. As a result the chances are very good that Scott Garner, for his misdeeds, will spend the rest of his life behind bars.
He will be sent from here to Pontiac where he will remain until he is 26 years old. He then will be transferred to the state penitenury. Asst state’s attorney Dady pleaded with the jury to give Garner a life sentence in order that the community may be made safe for white women.
On the first ballot practically every member of the jury held out for a life sentence. Two members held out for a ten year sentence. Ballot after ballot was taken. On the eigth ballot the result was 11 for life and one for 40 years. On the ninth ballot the man who held out for a term of years was won over and the verdict was reached.
After the verdict was read Atty Hanna made a formal motion for a new trial. This was overruled and Judge Edwards immediately passed the sentence on the negro moron, the most dangerous the community ever has had.

 
(32) Klu Klux hold meet at Greylake, Antioch News, April 3, 1924

Klu Klux hold meet at Greylake

Thursday evening the Klu Klux Klan had a meeting in the Opera House at Grayslake. Owing to the stormy weather, the audience was very small, scarcely seventy-five being present.

Attorney Hoy of Dallas, Texas was the speaker and was introduced as the best in that line. Mr Hoy was a very fluent talker and covered the essential points of that organization, as regards, what it stood for and what work it hoped to accomplish in a very effective manner.
The speaker pointed out that the American press was bought over by enemies of the Klan and consequently the American public  were very biased in their opinion of this organization. He stated that the Klan was for law and order, and keeping America for Americans, as at the present time the foreign-born were gaining a tremendous foothold, and at the same time were not showing any serious intentions of ever helping to sustain American ideals, those our forefathers had spilt blood to establish. The Klan hoped to elect Americans of good repute, and legislate so that the bars would be closed against a certain kind of immigration until we were able to assimilate the millions we have at present within our land.
Cards were passed out and those who felt so inclined were given a chance to express a desire to become a member. Several took advantage and signed up.
  
(33) Alleged “expose” of Ku Klux Klan here is printed Libertyville Independent, Thursday Dec 7, 1922

Alleged “expose” of Ku Klux Klan here is printed

List of purported local members is distributed among foes of the Klan

What is purported to be a list of the Waukegan members of the Ku Klux Klan is being mysteriously distributed in this city and the lists are being found on the doorsteps of the foes of the Klan. The list is an alphabetical one and contains the names of many prominent local men, a number being county officials and employees and city employees. The first list contains about 100 names and the circular states that others will follow. It is rumored that there are about 800 members of the Klan in Waukegan. Reports are out that detectives have been working in this city for weeks to get access to the membership roll of the Klan. One foe of the Klan states that the fact that the list is alphabetical is indicative that the detectives have succeeded in their aim.
Another prominent local man who is a foe of the Klan, who has just come into possession of the list, which was left on his doorstep, declares that the list without doubt is not authoritative as there were and are men included who absolutely would not belong to such an organization. He declared that if he thought the list were authoritative he would hereafter refuse to place any confidence in the brotherhood of mankind.
Only a few days ago, a local attorney declared that the activities of the Klan are believed to have extended even into the workings of the local juries, and the questioning of veniremen as to their affiliation with the organization might become necessary. He declared, however, that it would be next to impossible to get a Klansman to admit his affiliation, and that persons not affiliated would be offended if questioned upon the subject.
An effort is being made to check back to determine who printed or distributed the list to determine whether or not it is authoritative. It is declared that a number of men included in the list have been temporarily discharged by employers who fear the business of their institutions might be jeopardized as a result of their alleged connection to the Klan.
Leaders among those opposed to the Klan declare that great injustice may be done against many of those whose names are on the list if it is not authentic, and they therefore are making every effort to solve from what source it came.
Many contend that the list has been published for the purpose of stirring up religious, racial and political strife in the community and a number of leaders have urged their friends to utterly disregard the circular.

 

(34) The innocents by Radin, Edward D 1964 New York, Morrow, p 47-49

…The prosecutor was a member of the Klan. On the pretext that they were searching for an illegal still or bootleg whiskey, members of the prosecutor’s staff raided Montgomery’s home and wrecked the interior. The damage was so substantial and so obviously out of line of duty that a court directed the prosecutor to pay money damages to Mongomery to repair his home.

The prosecutor’s turn came November 11, 1923 when Mamie Snow, sixty-two, who was considered a harmless mental incompetent and was allowed to peddle shoelaces and similar notions door to door, complained to police that Montgomery had raped her. She was sent to Victory memorial Hospital; in Waukegan, where she was examined by Dr. John E Walter. Montgomery was picked up by police and the court record notes twenty-six years later that he was beaten so severely that ‘;scars on his face and head are still visible today.”  Montgomery denied the charge. The day after his arrest, when Miss Snow confronted Montgomery in the station house, she not only failed to identify him, but she said further that she had never before seen him.
The trial was held in January, 1924 and lasted twenty minutes. The physician who had examined Miss Snow was not called and there was virtually no defense. Montgomery did not take the stand. The defendant was found guilty and sentenced to life imprisonment. Mamie Snow was committed to a mental institution and died there two years later…
The defense council had been warned by Klan members not to put up any kind of defense for Montgomery. Even though he had twelve witnesses to prove that Montgomery had been miles away at the time of the alleged attack, the lawyer feared for his life and did not call these witnesses. In addition, the prosecutor personally threatened Montgomery with Klan reprisal if he should take the stand in his own defense. After his arrest, when Montgomery wanted a preliminary hearing to be released on bail, the prosecutor frightened him off by saying the Klan would get him if he were released….
…Judge Igoe lashed out at the conduct of the prosecutor:
“A prosecutor is supposed to be an impartial representative of public justice. The methods employed by the prosecution at Lake County in 1924 represents as shocking a situation as ever before presented before this court. A society cannot suppress lawlessness by an accused through the means of lawlessness of the prosecution. A society cannot inspire respect for the law by withholding its protection from those accused of crimes. It was and is the prosecuting attorney's duty to assist in giving a fair trial to a defendant…
To condone the methods evident in this case, is to invite grave injustice. There is one way to stop a practice that has become altogether too common and that is to bring it to a conscious level where the public can scrutinize it and take such steps as are necessary to insure a true rendition of justice to all, regardless of race, color or creed…. There was no trial here, but a sham, one of false pretenses and fraud.”
…Montgomery was released in August, 1949. Although he brought suit against the state for his illegal conviction and imprisonment, the Illinois Court of Claims refused to make any payment on the ground that the prosecutor was a county official and the state had no responsibility for his conduct. For many years after that legislation was introduced to compensate Montgomery, but no bill succeeded in passing…