the terre haute election trial

THE TERRE HAUTE ELECTION TRIAL BY STELLA C. STIMSON’

T m e Haute, Indiana

I K E all stories of real people and actual work, the story of the down-fall of Terre Haute’s political corruptionists must begin L awhile back. The removal and deportation to a federal prison

of the chief city and county officials, whose lips were hardly closed upon their oaths to support the constitution, was not a sudden catastrophe, but the culmination of a long period of progressive corruption. It was “an organized, deliberate conspiracy to assassinate government.”

One afternoon in February during the 1913 session of the lndiana legislature, a message came to the writer, who, as acting chairman of the legislative committee of the State federation of clubs, interested in i ts educational and social measures was listening to a senate debate, that a gentleman desired an interview on a matter of business. Going into the lobby, the seeker of the interview was found to be Donn Roberts of Terre Haute. He led the way to the lieutenant governor’s private room, made some comment on the legislature, and then said abruptly, “ I intend to be a candidate for mayor of Terre Haute, I want the support of you women, and if elected I will be the best mayor the city ever had.” As Mr. Roberts had never been anything but a political tool in Terre Haute, “his only claim to distinction, his ability to stuff ballot boxes and vote repeaters,” both the announcement and request were startling. I n reply, the writer asked him if he would enforce the laws if elected mayor. “Not as you church women, but as most of Terre Haute citizens think they should be enforced,” was his prompt answer. “I’ll have good streets, and give the people a business administration.” When told that Terre Haute women wanted good schools, good courts, and streets free from gamblers, wicked women and drunken men and that most of the men wanted law enforcement, also, Mr. Roberts replied quickly, “The vote does not show it.” I n the long conversation over Terre Haute affairs, he talked much of his personal good habits and virtues, bu t to all suggestions that a mayor should stand for civic righteousness, Mr. Roberts had the one emphatic reply, “ the election returns prove

Mrs. Stimson, who has written this impressive article, was one of the leaders in the whole movement, so she speaks with authority. The whole story is a striking illustra- tion of effective civic work and might well be carefully studied in other communities suffering aa Terre Haute suffered. Mrs. Stimson, in addition to being identified with numerous efforts to improve local conditions, is also an active factor in the Indiana federation of women’s clubs.-C. R. W.

38

19161 THE T E R R E HAUTE ELECTION TRIAL 39

that a majority of Terre Haute citizens do not want law enforcement. They want the all night and Sunday saloon, the segregated district and gambling.” Upon the further suggestion by the writer that there might be possibly something wrong with the election returns, and that a t all events there was something wrong in a mayor deciding what laws to enforce or not to enforce, Roberts said, “I’m going to be mayor of Terre Haute and you women might as well support me.” “Not upon a lax law enforcement platform,” was the writer’s reply, and the interview ended.

Roberts had been in constant attendance a t the 1913 legislature trying to defeat Mrs. Albion Fellows Bacons’ tenement bill against which he had personally worked during the 1909 and 1911 sessions. Plot after plot to kill the housing bill had been discovered in time to thwart them, and during the interview concerning the mayorality above mentioned, there was the feeling on thc part of the writer that Roberts sought the interview in a n attempt to trade his anti-housing lobby for the support of Terre Haute women in his contemplated campaign. The opportunity even to mention such a thing was carefully guarded against.

The primary election of city officials in Terre Haute was to be held in about three months. For years the sixth ward precincts had been notorious for false registrations and fraud and violence on election day. Yet the vote from thwe same precincts had generally decided the election result. A few women determined to know exactly how this ward’s elections were conducted. The council of women’s organizakions held a meeting and decided to go to the polls. A one page digest in simple language of the primary election law was made and printed, tally sheets were prepared for each precinct with its election officials’ names type- written at the top. A schedule of hours was arranged that there might be two or more women at each precinct from the time the polls opened until they closed. On a cold raw day, the women-about sixty in all-kept tally of the voters of the sixth ward. They noted to the minute with watches the law violations, repeating, and license numbers of automobiles bringing voters. When night came, these women were wiser citizens, though with faith somewhat shaken in the integrity of election methods. What astonished them most was the absence of good citizens and the presence of bad citizens a t the polls. Many good men did not go a t all and those who did stayed only long enough t o vote, they neither watched nor helped- while saloon men, owners, bartenders and hangers-on were present all day, as were brewery automobiles!

Roberts and his ticket were nominated over the regular Democratic organization candidates. I n the campaign which followed, the liquor element supported Roberts and this strength was augmented by speech making and press talk against public corporations, especially the city

Penny natebooks and pencils were provided.

40 NATIONAL MUNICIPAL REVIEW [January

traction company which brought to his support a large honest following among the labor people. Instead of relying upon his actual strength, Roberts planned definitely to use repeaters and to corrupt election boards as has since been proved by court evidence.

A few days later, the civic league asked the women to go to all the polling places of the city, as well as those of the sixth ward, a t the November election. It was not easy to perfect such an organization, but seven wards and 55 precinct chairmen were appointed with helpers, numbering more than 450 in all. A number of women spent a week in the city clerk’s office copying names and residences of voters from the registration books. With these poll books in hand, most of the women then investigated their precincts, house by house. They found many illegal registrations, names from vacant lots, school buildings, stores, and houses where only women lived. As in the May primary, tally sheets, election law digests and notebooks were prepared. Armed with these and with their poll books, watches and cameras, the women, thoroughly non-partisan, went to the polls to work for an honest, clean election.

A few attorneys had investigated the illegal registrations and had attempted through injunction to restrain the Roberts inspectors from violently or fraudulently removing from the election board the officials of the minority party, but on election day not an order of court was carried out and no sheriffs could be found. Some anti-Roberts politicians, who knew their lives would be in danger if they went or sent workers to the polls of the bad precincts, hired strangers-Burns’ detectives-to go in order to get the evidence, but these men were promptly arrested, bailed out, re- arrested, refused bail and jailed. A few men who had had no election experience in Terre Haute, two assistant school superintendents, a few ministers and professors ventured into the sixth ward, which includes the segregated vice district, to be knocked down and beaten when they attempted to challenge voters. The most worthless men of the city, its habitual drinkers, its prize fighters, its gamblers, its “red light” hangers- on, its worst bartenders had been made deputy sheriffs and provided with tin badges and guns, both of which were flashed whenever decent citizens attempted to remonstrate.

The women a t the polls were not molested, but when these women saw, about the middle of the morning, that there was not even the pretense of an election in the worst precincts and that good people were powerless, n telegram was sent advising Governor Ralst,on of the situation. He replied that he had telephoned the sheriff to keep the peace and advised seeing the sheriff. This was not possible, for the sheriff was not to be found; he was said to be in a saloon. Later in the day, the governor was again telegraphed to and informed that the sheriff and his deputies

The registration in October, 1913, was heavily padded.

The men, aside from the politicians, had no such organization.

19161 THE TERRE HAUTE ELECTION TRIAL 41

themselves were causing the most of the trouble, and about five o’clock a few “tin badge deputies” were taken off , but the vote was in. Roberts and his ticket were declared elected, though with a majority much smaller than expected by his supporters, who lost money, i t is said, on the election wagers. The whole city knew the election was dishonest, nearly 500 women had evidence of it, yet no contest was begun. In fact, one of the leading business men, recognized as a man who wanted the city right, said the following morning for publication, “Let’s forget the election and boom Terre Haute.” The women and a few young attorneys tried to insist upon an investigation, but in vain.

Roberts became mayor, January 1, 1914. Because there were not offices enough for him to fill and thus keep all his pre-election promises, some of his friends became enemies, among them the judge of the Vigo circuit court, who called a grand jury and appointed a special prosecutor for an election probe. Several indictments were returned. The trial and conviction of one of Roberts’ city appointees came first. Roberts himself was indicted and, in the trial which followed, the evidence of fraudulent registration and voting was so overwhelming that respectable citizens did not think it necessary to attend court to the end of the trial. At one time, a raid was made upon the office of the special prosecutor, by the president of the board of safety, the chief of police, with five policemen, in an attempt to seize the election records and thus prevent their use in the prosecution. The door of the office had to be barricaded and kept shut by force until a restraining order could be obtained. The trial went on, but suddenly “something” happened to the court, the probing grand jury and special prosecutor were dismissed, court room scenes became violent, the closing arguments were cut short and the trial came rapidly to an end. The jury promptly returned a verdict of “not guilty l J and a disgraceful demonstration followed-the night parade of gamblers, drunkards, saloon men and debased women can never be forgotten by the decent citizens who were forced to see and hear it. One transparency said, “Donn Roberts, the idol of Terre Haute,” another, (‘Donn Roberts for governor.” His candidacy for governor, unbelievable as it may be, was, however, soon announced and many portions of the state placarded with his photograph by one of the men on the city pay-roll of Terre Haute.

Nominated in violence, corruptly elected, corruptly acquitted of the crime of his own election, Roberts planned in the fall of 1914 to elect a t a general election of county, state, congressional and senatorial candidates, a group of county officials who would continue to work in harmony with the already established corrupt city officialdom.

Roberts continued to make enemies among his own sort. The city was filled with gamblers. Theft and murder became more frequent-actually

But Terre Haute had some aroused and determined citizens.


frequent. Everything was neglected, but street building for which many contracts had been let. But i t was soon discovered that the street building specifications were peculiar and were not being carried out by contractors. Roberts attempted to dictate to the school city, tried to prevent by injunction the school trustees from buying a much needed school site. Law-suits in which Roberts and the city were involved multiplied, and as the fall election approached, there was much unrest and a realization that Roberts’ candidates were men with no sense of the responsibility of public duty.

Civic organizations, business, and social, however, seemed to be para- lyzed. A few men and women, however, were determined to get evidence again at the polls with the hope that a federal court could have jurisdic- tion as United States senators and representatives were to be elected. The political party opposing Roberts became encouraged and laid its plans. Registration day in October was watched, and a careful investigation of the padded registration lists was made in the succeeding days, for much repeating had been observed. As election day drew near, men said they did not dare to go into the dangerous precincts and advised the women not to do it. It was not difficult to get electtion officials and poll watchers at most of the precincts, but the fear was general about those of the sixth ward and two or three others. At a meeting called by the ’president of the Woman’s council-Mrs. U. 0. Cox, the wife of a professor of the state normal school-many of the women thought i t useless, as well as dangerous, to go into the sixth ward. The election of t.he previous year had proved that it was not safe for the men to go to precincts “A,” “ B ” and “C.”

The “A” precinct was in the heart of the vice district, had the largest illegal registrations-sixty votes from a one-room saloon and more than a hundred from another, and evidence of its voting methods was abso- lutely necessary. The writer had been placed in charge of the Woman’s council election committee, and she decided that she must herself get poll book evidence in “A.” A friend, Mrs. Mary S. Rhoads, volunteered to go, also. The general secretary of the Y. W. C. A., Miss Emma B. Moore, went t o precinct “B,” whose polling place was within a stone’s throw of a score of well known houses of ill-fame. A few fine women voluntarily made up the rest of the sixth ward woman’s organization. These women had worked a t these polls the previous year in the city election and were sure that charity and rescue work in former years would protect them from physical violence.

Poll books were carefully made for every precinct of the city, with false registrations marked with a red ink ‘‘ challenge.” Trained by previous election experience, the women did effective work. I n normal precincts in other wards, upright men and women prevented the voting of illegal registrations, but this made fraudulent voting all the more


necessary in the bad precincts and the men and women who went to them knew what to expect. I n one, an honest election sheriff, Wesley A. Mitchell, had to defend his life by shooting a deputy sheriff because of an attack carefully planned by the assistant chief of police, a deputy sheriff and two prize fighters and “gunmen” of national reputation, who were determined to get him away from the polls in order that a large illegal foreign vote might be recorded. At precinct “B,” men who protested against repeating were assaulted or arrested and jailed-among them Rev. I. B. Harper, pastor of the Methodist Church, and Prof. Jas. H. Baxter of the Indiana state normal school.

At another, the notorious Taylorville precinct, whose duly appointed minority election board officials had been arrested in the small hours of the night preceding the election, thrown into jail and refused bail, the voting machine was used and the lever worked without even the formality of rushing in repeating voters who were too busy elsewhere. Neither the sheriff nor any of his deputies were available to serve orders of the judge of the superior court who stood alone among a debauched or nerve- less group of county officials. This judge, John E. Cox, was compelled to appoint, from his bed in the middle of the night before election, special officers to serve his orders of court. These officers after being beaten with clubs were run away from the polling place with revolver shots. The lone woman watcher, Mrs. Minta Morgan, saw her own husband driven away, but stood 5er ground-and the voting machine lever was turned until the agreed upon number of voters was reported.

I n another precinct, the county sheriff sat in a saloon, open contrary to law, and paid repeaters with his own hand all day long. I n this precinct there were many repeating negroes, though court investigation has since proved that only one negro lived in it.

At precinct “A,” where no respectable man dared to t ry to work, i t was surely an ominous commentary on democratic government to see saloon keepers and evil resort owners working with the city judge to let wretched cocaine and liquor victims, white and colored, vote over and over again with only a woman or two to protest. Former judges of the courts and the presidents of the chamber of commerce and manufacturers club, could only look on for a few minutes, feel their helplessness and go away. Because almost every city and county official was in the conspiracy, nothing could be done, but get the evidence. It was for this, the women stayed.

Had the writer left the polls for one moment during that exhausting day from 5.30 a.m. until 6.05 p.m., this story would not have been written. A saloon keeper-the Roberts precinct committeeman in this notorious precinct was Irish with the fine instincts of race not entirely obliterated by “red light” associations-assured that the crooked result was not endangered, was kind to the writer and her companion, brought


them a dinner and stopped violence and profanity in their presence. Quiet reigned throughout the day because there were no men to protest. But the repeaters went steadily in. A number of them were turned back because they were recognized by the women, but a legal challenge was never made, the challenger was never permitted to enter the polling precinct door-evidence which proved convincing in court.

When night brought the election returns, and, as in former elections, a few precincts, the worst in the city, had determined its policy and government, the citizens were stunned and bewildered. The following day, good men and women forgot their work, even school boys and girls knew that the Roberts circuit judge’s alleged victory of ten votes was in reality a defeat by many hundred votes as has been since proved in court.

The women felt that something should be done, if possible, and sent a telegram to a federal judge, A. B. Anderson, of Indianapolis. I n the evening, they learned that the Roberts candidate for judge had gone post- haste to the governor with his alleged ten vote majority to ask for his commission. The governor was telephoned not to sign it, and did not for two days. The next day, the women who had seen the fraud and violence a t the polls, who knew the returns were false, signed a petition directed t o the district attorney of the federal court, Frank C. Dailey, asking for an investigation of the election. A brilliant and courageous attorney, Joseph R. Roach, whose early unfortunate career had given him intimate knowledge of the gambling and vice so prevalent and open in Terre Haute had become an avowed enemy of Roberts, and, using his familiarity with the ins and outs of the underworld, gave invaluable assistance in the investigation.

The indictment and trial of Mayor Roberts and other officers and political workers are now a part of the political history of the United States and a brief chronological statement is all that is possible to give in the con- fines of this article and perhaps all that is necessary.

1914. Nov. 7. Suit filed for recount of votes alleging fraud in election of judge, sheriff and prosecutor.

Nov. 10. Committee of citizens appointed to raise funds for court investigation.

Nov. 18. Eighteen so-called gunmen and repeaters arrested by federal authorities upon affidavit before United States commissioner.

Nov. 19. County officers with all election documents summoned before federal grand jury.

Nov. 23. Redman (the Roberts circuit court candidate) assumed duties as circuit judge and began operations. “Gang picked jury im- paneled at once to intimidate federal witnesses and get their evidence.”

Charles Clogston, editor of a fearless Terre Haute evening paper, arrested,

Nov. 24. Terre Haute women before federal grand jury.


arraigned, sentenced and jailed by Judge Redman within a period of three hours for contempt for his “gang picked grand jury” newspaper statement.

Nov. 26. Judge Anderson of federal court released editor Clogston on habeas corpus and severely reprimanded the sheriff and prosecutor.

Nov. 27. Terre Haute grand jury dismissed. Chamber of commerce endorsed election probe and voted financial aid.

Dec. 5. Women summoned again to Indianapolis to identify repeaters. Resignation of Terre Haute deputy prosecutor.

Dec. 15. Confessions of repeaters and gunmen in Indianapolis. Ro- tarians endorse election probe.

Dec. 20. Chief of police summoned before federal grand jury. Dec. 25. U. S. Marshal Mark Storen went to Terre Haute with 126

1915. Jan. 12. Eighty conspirators plead guilty in federal court.

March 8. Trial began on charge of conspiracy, 400 witnesses sum-

April 5. Jury returned verdict of guilty against each defendant on

April 12. Sentences pronounced by Judge Anderson. April 18. Mayor Roberts, circuit court judge Redman, county sheriff

Shes, city judge Smith, with other city and county officials, taken to the federal prison at Leavenworth. Others committed to Marion county jail for shorter terms.

The investigation, indictment and trial of the Terre Haute election conspirators stands out in the legal history of the United States, remarkable for its thoroughness, dignity and conception of the fundamentals of government involved. The honesty and kindliness of the district attorney, Mr. Dailey, toward the defendants, won confessions from them and their pleas of guilty; his courage kept him clear from undesirable political interference; his energy and in all his remarkable personality made a success almost miraculous of the stupendous task resting upon him as United States district attorney and proved that President Wilson had made no mistake in appointing him to this position. The fame of Judge Anderson was already known from coast to coast before this precedent-making trial. If his sentences were a little too merciful, as some people think, his observations from the bench will never be forgotten by the people of Indiana. His mercy and moderation had general approval.

In June, following the federal prosecution, Judge George D. Sunkel, of the Parke county circuit court, rendered a decision in a civil contest election suit that unseated Judge Redman and placed Charles L. Pulliam on the bench. In August, Judge Sunkel, in throwing out the entire

warrants, made 116 arrests.

Retail merchants’ association endorse probe.

moned.

every count of indictment.

Mr. Dailey’s remarkable speech to the jury.


vote of precinct “A,” rendered a precedent-making decision, which gave the office of sheriff t o George W. Krietenstein.

Terre Haute now has good judges, both county and city, and a sheriff’s office that can be depended upon. But best of all is this-its citizenship is awake, and knows that “ the life of our form of government depends upon honest elections. Failing to secure this, we justify the cause of the anarchist, the nihilist and all others whose creed is in opposition to law and order. The Terre Haute conspirators struck a t the very life of the state itself.” A n editorial in Indiana’s largest paper said, “There is not a community in this land in which Terre Haute’s political prototypes may not be found. . , . We have even gone so far as to speak of the practices of these men in‘ a jesting way. The moral is plain, and it is that the people of this country must take their affairs into their own hands, smash every boss who raises his head, and see to i t that elections honestly reflect the will of the people.”

the terre haute election trial

Documents