Illinois v. Small

"Caesar had his Brutus, Jesus Christ had his Judas Iscariot, the United States had its Benedict Arnold and Jefferson Davis, and Illinois has Len Small. And if the Judas of Illinois had the courage of the Judas of Jesus, he would return the 30 pieces of silver, get a rope and hang himself, and remove the withering blight which will remain upon this state as long as he is Governor of Illinois."

So, last week, spoke Representative J. Bert Miller, addressing the General Assembly of Illinois on Governor Lennington Small of Illinois.

Later in the week, Governor Small agreed to pay the State of Illinois $650,000 in settlement of a certain civil suit against him. In return for this payment, he was absolved from blame in connection with the money involved in the suit.

The case of the State of Illinois v. Len Small, et al., began in 1921, was based on acts committed by the Governor in 1917, at which time he was state treasurer. As treasurer he deposited some millions of dollars of Illinois money in a bank controlled by one of his friends, the late State Senator E. C. Curtis. The bank paid Illinois 2% interest and lent the money to Chicago packing houses at 8% interest rate. Enemies of Mr. Small maintained that he, as well as the bank, profited on this transaction. In fact, Representative Miller in the oration previously quoted said that Governor Small "had his hands up to the shoulders in the state treasury."

But when the State of Illinois brought criminal proceedings against the Governor, the jury acquitted him (1922).

There remained civil suit to recover from Mr. Small and the Curtis estate, an amount placed by the state at $1,025,000. Because Governor Small disputed many items in the state bill, a Master in Chancery was appointed to report on the exact sum owed. Last week the approaching Chancery decision brought the six-year-old case once more into black, streaming headlines.

The friends of the Governor, realizing that the decision might definitely name him as having personally profited by the state fund deposit and loan, foresaw also the possibility of his enemies attempting to oust him from office on quo warranto proceedings. Such quo warranto (by what right) proceedings would have been based on the argument that Governor Small took oath as Governor while in possession of funds illegally secured during his term as treasurer, that, under such circumstances, he had no right to hold the office of Governor and should therefore be removed from it. If quo warranto action was instituted in an unfriendly court, the Governor might well find himself judicially barred from concluding his term.

To avert this threatened unpleasantness, the Governor's friends introduced a bill giving the Governor as well as other state officials immunity from quo warranto proceedings. Critics questioned the constitutionality of the measure, but the Illinois Senate speedily passed it. Last week it came up in the House, on which occasion Representative Miller made his comparison between the Governor and Judas and his remark about hands reaching up to the shoulders. Despite these criticisms, the House passed the bill, 108 to 29, and Governor Small speedily signed it.

But though tne pending Chancery decision thus appeared to have dwindled from a possible menace to a probable irritation, the Governor proceeded to settle it entirely by his compromise payment. The original $1,025,000 had dropped to some $802,000, many items of which were still disputed. So Attorney General Carlstrom, prosecuting the case, agreed to accept a payment of $650,000 and costs.

In return for this, the official statement was made and agreed to by the State that "the liability of the said defendant, Len Small, in this case is solely for interest received by the other defendants herein." In other words, though Treasurer Small, by virtue of his office, could be held liable for the bank's profit from its handling of state funds, he personally was acquitted of having received a portion of those profits for his own benefit, advancement or pleasure.

Thus closed a famed case with what those hostile to Governor Small termed the acquisition of perhaps the most expensive coat of whitewash known in the annals of exculpation.