The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1875-10-18


can candidate for state treasurer. Capt
Hurter, the present deputy state treas
urer, charged, Immediately after the
nomination of Pfaender, tnat he had
been bought off by Munich from being
candidate against him on former oc-
casioE, by the liberal use OF state funds,
with which he carried on lumber yard
| at New Ulm. Pfaender at cnce COM
meneed an action against Hurter for
libel. no doubt expecting to scare Hurter
into retraction ;but Hurter did not scare
worth a cent, and instead of retracting
he comes out with an answer to the suit
in which he swears that the charge is
true and produces some very substan-
TALLY documentary evidence to prove it.
This evidence will settle Pfaender's
chances for election unless he at once
comes forward and demands an imme-
diate trial OF the case. This we under
stand Hurter is anxious for. Is Piaen.
ner willing to go to trial nou? Ii he is
not will the people conclude that he
shrinks from an exposure Of the vii
lianies of that Munch-Seeger era?
The following is Capt. Hurersanswer:
That the said Munich and certain of his
friends, who Were strongly desirous to have
Mr.. VIM. Seeger, the tather-in-law of said
Munich, to succeed the latter in Office, in order
that they might control the management OF
the State Treasury in their own interests,
heard OF the intentions of the plaintiff to be-
come candidate for said Office with alarm, and
they, Or some of them, waited upon the plain
! tif and besought him not to become cand-
| date for said Office, and, as an inducement to
him not to become a candidate for said Office,
proposed to him to asst him in the lumber
business by advancing lumber or money, or
both. That the plaintiff accepted said offer
and consented to, and did refrain from becom-
| ing candidate for said Office; whereby the
said Munch and his friends succeeded in the
nomination and election Of the said Seeger to
| the said Office. That in pursuance of the said
arrangement, the said Munich, either by him
self or in connection with certain Of his con-
| fdentlal friends, did advance, or cause to be
| advanced to the plaintiff. lumber and money!
the latter to be repaid at some future time with
interest; such money having been funds taken
from the State Treasury of this State as the
| plaintiff then had good reason to believe, If he
| did not actually know. The defendant was
confirmed in his belief of the truthfulness OF
his information, by the following circum-
stances: The defendant, during the term of
| Office OF the said Seeger acted as his deputy,
and as such was constantly in attendance at
said Office during business hours, and per-
sonally transacted the greater part Of the law
full and ordinary business Of said office. During
his term OF Office the said Seeger, as this de-
tendant frequently obsei we'd, kept with his own
hand certain private books of entries relating
to transactions CONNECTED with the money be.
longing to the Treasury, which books this de-
fendant was not, while the said See,er
remained in Office, permitted by hun to in
spect. When the said Seeger went
out of said Office he destroyed all said books,
except two or three, which We're apparently
overlooked by, and were left in the Office Of
the Stat. Treasurer. Two Of said books are
labelled res pectivelv sBlotter b. and 'Blotter
D. and after said Seeger had left said Office
tha defendant, who then aud ever since has re-
manned in said Office as the deputy of the pres
ent incumbent examined said books and found
therein entries under the head OF moneys re-
ceved into the Treasury, as follows;
In ''Blotter B, under date Of March 5, 1871,
"Wnl. Pr, 1900, l5." In .'Blottar D., under
date Of November 20. 1874. "E. NJ. VIM Pr,
$500" In the same book under date Of jan
uary 6, 1875 The said initials "E NJ" in said
entries were used by the said Seeger, as the de.
fendant Is informed and believes to designate
the said Emil Munich, and the said entries
We're Used by the said Seeger, as the defendant
is informed and believes, to designate the
plaintiff. The defendant honestly believing all
and singular the matters aforesaid concerning
his friends and the plaintiff with reference TO
the candidacy of the latter for the Office OF
State Treasurer TO BE- true. when the plaintiff
became regular candidate before :lie people
OF this State FOR the said Office the present year:
the defersian, deemed that the interests of the
people Of this .tate euanded that he should
make public what he had learned touching the
said Transactions and therefore tbs. defendant
without any malice or ili-fe-iirg whatsoever
toward tie plaintiff, composed and caused 10
bs published III the said Pioneer Press COM
municatien concerning the past conduct of the
plaintiff gnd his qualifications TO exercise said
Office, aIlJ in said communication us-d the
language set forth in the complaint. Wherc-
fore The. defendant demands Judgment that he
be dismissed with his costs aud disbursements
GILNay, cLorGH j. LANE.
ATTORNEYS for defendant.
STATE OF MINNESOTA.
Ramsey County.
Henry = Hur.er, b-iny duly sworn, says be
is the ds.s-ndsn; in the action mentioned in
the foregoing answer, and that the said answer
is true u his own knowledge, except as To the
matters therein stated on the information and
belief, ami as 10 those matters that Le brlieves
!. to be .rne.
HENRY s, HrKIgR.
Sut~csbed and swern TO before me this 6th
day Of October, A. d. 1875.
fsoTAEzAL SEAL. Z. K. Lane
Notark Rks.ic.