FIELDEN, NEEBE AND SCHWAB.
WAS IT AN ACT OF PERSONAL REVENGE?
While some men may tamely submit to being clubbed and seeing their
brothers shot down, there are some who will resent it, and will nurture a
spirit of hatred and seek revenge for themselves, and the occurrences that preceded the Haymarket tragedy indicate that the bomb was thrown by some one
who, instead of acting on the advice of anybody, was simply seeking personal
revenge for having been clubbed, and that Capt. Bonfield is the man who is
really responsible for the death of the police officers.
It is also shown that the character of the Haymarket meeting sustains
this view. The evidence showB there were only 800 to 1,000 people present,
and that it was a peaceable and orderly meeting; that the mayor of the city
was present and saw nothing out of the way, and that he remained until the
crowd began to disperse, the meeting being practically over, and the crowd
engaged in dispersing when he left; that had the police remained away for
twenty minutes more there would have been nobody left there, but as soon as
Bonfield had learned that the mayor had left, he could not resist the temptation to have some more people clubbed, and went up with a detachment of
police to disperse the meeting; and that on the appearance of the police the
bomb was thrown by some unknown person, and several innocent and faithful
officers, who were simply obeying an uncalled for order of their superior, were
killed. All of these facts tend to show the improbability of the theory of the
prosecution that the bomb was thrown as a result of a conspiracy on the part
of the defendants to commit murder; if the theory of the prosecution were
correct, there would have been many more bombs thrown; and the fact that
only one was thrown shows that it was an act of personal revenge.
It is further shown here, that much of the evidence given at the trial was
a pure fabrication; that some of the prominent police officials, in their zeal,
not only terrorized ignorant men by throwing them into prison and threatening them with torture if they refused to swear to anything desired, but that
they offered money and employment to those who would consent to do this.
Further, that they deliberately planned to have fictitious conspiracies formed
in order that they might get the glory of discovering them. In addition to the
evidence in the record of some witnesses who swore that they had been paid
small sums of money, etc., several documents are here referred to.
First, an interview with Capt. Ebersold, published in the Chicago Daily.
News, May 10, 1889.
CHIEF OF POLICE EBERSOLD'S STATEMENT.
Ebersold was chief of the police of Chicago at the time of the Haymarket
trouble, and for a long time before and thereafter, so that he was in a position
to know what was going on, and his utterances upon this point are therefore
important. Among other things he says:
" It was my policy to quiet matters down as soon as possible after the 4th
of May. The general unsettled state of things was an injury to Chicago.
" On the other hand, Capt. Schaack wanted to keep things stirring. He
wanted bombs to be found here, there, all around, everywhere. I thought
people would lie down and sleep better if they were not afraid that their
homes would be blown to pieces any minute. But this man Schaack, this little