or the laws of the State of Illinois, he is instructed to rescind them.

"Very respectfully yours,

U. S. GRANT.

"To HIS EXCELLENCY, JOHN M. PALMER, Governor of Illinois, Springfield, Illinois."

My expectation of future exemption from military interference was based upon the belief that the authorities of the state had already done enough for the maintenance of law and for the protection of all the interests of the people of Chicago to merit their full confidence, and that the local officers were then so alive to their duties and so confident in the support of a powerful state that no room would be left for external intervention. Everything, indeed, had been done for the aid of the people of Chicago that was possible, and if all were not secure, it was because the resources of civil government were not equal to their necessities.

General Grant, General Sherman and General Sheridan are dead, and I forbear to criticise their acts. I content myself with furnishing the documents and papers which give a history of the Chicago fire and of the controversies which it originated.

CHAPTER XXIV.

Meeting of the legislature in 1874-End of my term of office-Provision for education-Defense of grand juries-Mobs-NewspapersChange of venue-Challenge to jurors-Pardons-Change in criminal law suggested-The poor-Suggestion of an officer to represent poor prisoners-The railroads.

On January 8, 1873, the general assembly of the State of Illinois convened in its biennial session. On the tenth day of the same month the two houses, in pursu ance of the constitution, met and canvassed the votes cast at the preceding election for state officers, and found that Richard J. Oglesby had received for the office of governor 237,774: Gustavus Koerner, 197,094; and B. G. Wright, 2,185 votes.

Governor Oglesby was on January 13, 1873, duly inaugurated, and upon that event my connection with the office of governor ended. By the constitution of the state it is made the duty of the governor, at the commencement of each session, and at the close of his term of office, to give to the general assembly information by message of the condition of the state, and also to recommend such measures as he shall deem expedient. This constitutional duty I had discharged on the day of the opening of the session, by a message in writing. In the message I alluded to the prosperity and growth of the state, I said:

"In all the material elements essential to its future growth and prosperity, the State of Illinois has nothing more to desire. Nor can it be asserted that the people of the state have been unmindful of their social duties, for public provision for the education of all the children of the state is already made, and will hereafter keep pace with advancing public wants, while institutions intended for the purposes of advanced education and higher

culture are increasing in number, and are widening their field of usefulness, and though our general system for the poor and permanently helpless classes is not complete, nor yet entirely satisfactory in its methods or results, the people of the state have cheerfully submitted to all taxes imposed upon them for that class of objects, and have gone beyond their representatives in demanding that nothing required by the most enlightened humanity for the relief or maintenance of objects of public charity shall be left undone."

I then added, that which I repeat now with the utmost satisfaction: "That notwithstanding my extensive intercourse with the people of this state during my official term, I have never heard from any person a murmur against any tax actually levied or proposed for the benefit of the afflicted or helpless.

I also in this message referred to the prevalence of mobs, and enumerated instances of such outrages. I said: "That in every instance of outrage by mobs, I had offered a reward of one thousand dollars from the contingent fund for the apprehension and conviction of the perpetrators of such murders. I denounced the leaders of mobs, and characterized them as cowards, who, to indulge private and personal resentments, organize and direct the passions of the people to the commission of crimes." Then, as now, the administration of the criminal laws of the state commanded a large share of public attention. The newspapers, especially those published in Chicago, complained of the failure of public justice, and there were public meetings which adopted resolutions condemning the alleged increase of crime in the cities of the state, and especially in Chicago.

After the great fire in Chicago there was less of crime than there had been before. I therefore said: "That considering the extraordinary circumstances of the almost total destruction of the city within little more than a year past, and the great influx of population from every quarter the laws are enforced, and order is as well

maintained in Chicago as in other great cities of the country.' I also said: "It is true some startling examples of fraud in commercial circles have occurred in Chicago that are in their influence, more disastrous to the morals, the business and the character of the people of the state than is the aggregate effect of many minor offenses." I added, "that the commercial frauds to which I alluded, seem to be characteristic of the period."

There was at that time an extensive belief that crimes of a homicidal character were increasing in frequency, and in the eagerness of many, propositions were made to reform the criminal laws of the state.

One class of reformers proposed the abolition of grand juries, and that state's attorneys should by information accuse of crimes and misdemeanors.

In the second place, it was proposed to take from persons charged with crime the right to a change of venue; thirdly, it was proposed to disallow challenge to jurors to persons charged with crime, upon the ground of an opinion formed from information obtained from printed publications, or, as it was urged by some, that no challenge should be allowed if the proposed juror would swear that he would try the case fairly, notwithstanding any opinions he had formed.

Another proposition was made to make death the penalty in all cases of conviction for murder; and then followed the proposition to deprive the governor of the power to pardon offenders after conviction. I said in my message that "to those who have such confidence in mere legislation that they assume every abuse may be corrected and every evil repressed by laws; and to that other class, ignorant of the origin, history and reasons of the institutions, rules and methods of procedure proposed to be abrogated or changed, and who welcome every change in the existing laws as an improvement, all the alterations proposed will be acceptable, but others will remember that the grand jury, 'one of the "institutions" of our free-spirited fathers, and most of the