The Worthington advance. [volume] (Worthington, Minn.) 1874-1908, 1876-10-19
THE ELECTION A:FFAIIf.

AND THE FACTS *,"@S - :.
An item appeared in our columns last
week, before our return from the east,
stating that the books. papers, furni-
ture, ETC., of the Colony Office had been
| thrown into the street in a highland
ed and illegal Manner On our return
Friday night we found the town in a
blaze of excitement over the affair.
Owing to this excitement, and TO the
fact that \ prosecution for assault and
battery grew out Of the taking posses
sion of the Colony Office and the re-
moval Of the furniture into the street,
we deem it our duty as a public jour-
nalist to give a:full account of the af-
fair, giving all sides a fair hearing.
With this view, our reporter has inter-
viewed the parties best able to give Il
fair statement for each side, viz: the
attorneys for both sides, the Rev. ]. c.
Ogle, President of the Methodist Board
of Trustees; and Prof. Humiston, into
whose Office the parties entered and
whose furniture was carried into the
street.
ATTORNEY ROnREE's STATEMENT.
Our reporter first called Oh Daniel
Rohrer, attorney for the Trustees of
the NJ. L. Church, for a statement Of
the legal aspect of the matter from
their stand point. Mr.. Rohrer promptly
stated that they did not claim rent and
the election was not on that ground.
They claimed that the lease had ex-
pired, and that, as the room was not
vacateI, the representatives of the
Trustees had a right to enter tie Office
and take peaceable possession. The
law in such cases, Mr.. Rohrer gives
substantially as follows:
When u tenant. after the expiration
of the lease, holds over, he is q mere
wrong-doer. lie is not entitled to no.
tice to quit. The owner may re-enter
at any time, taking care that he does
not do so with Il strong hand or q
multitude of people but in 4 pe:ceable
way" The goods are to he removed
without unnecessary damage. If the
tenant resists the reinoval"he is guilty
of All assault, and force sufficient to
disarm him or remove him, may he used.
The act is by authority of the Trus-
tees OF the Church, for whom the parties
had authority to act.
ATTORNEY CLAEK's STATEMENT.
Our reporter next called on Messrs.
Clark & Soule, attorneys for Prof.
Humiston, and interviewed Mr. Clark.
Mr.. Clark stated that Prof. Humis-
ton was Il tenant by verbal lease; that
the lease was not for any definite time.
but that he was tenant from year to
year; that lie had occupied the office for
two years without interruption and had
entered upon the third year since Sep
TENDER. lie WAS therefore entitled TO
notice to quit before the expiration of
any one year, and that having entered
upon the third year without notice to
quit, he was entitled to the occupancy
Of the room until the expiration of tile
third year. They claim, therefore, that
the representatives of the Trustees en-
tered the office and took forclble and
illegal possession, i'll the absence of
Prof. llumlstOn, who alone could give
peaceable possession, and against the
earnest protest Of tile clerk, who was
then III the Office, and who had no au-
thOrlty to give possession. And, there
| fore, they claim that, under the statute
Furnishing forcible and unlawful entry
and detainer. the parties engag ed in
the act are liable to !, fine of not more
than 500, and they are also liable in an
action of trespass.
REV. J. C. OGLE's STATEMENT,
Our reporter also called on Rev. j. c..
Ogle, Chairman of the Board of Trus-
tees of the NJ. E. Church, who makes
substantially the following statement:
Mcssrs. G. z. Sutton, l. N. Safer and
=. Blg9l0W were appointed by the
Board Of Trustees a committee on the
renting of all the rooms III Methodist
Block excepting the church room, hav-
meeting of the Board of Trustees.
Under this arrangement, this commit
tee would have the renting Of the room
known as the Colony Office. and the
collecting of the rent. However. 1T an
official meeting of the Board. the COM
mittee were instructed to present bill
to Professor Humist0n for the rent.
AS to the election, there was no formal
meeting upon the subject, and of course
no formal instructions, but the COM
mittee having charge of the rooms
acted without instructions from the
Board, and without the knowledge of
the Church. This is my statement of
nv understanding of the affair. and all
l care to say about the matter at pres
ent.
PROF. HUM1STON'S STATEMENT.
Next our reporter called on Prof.
Humiston for a statement, who gave
the following history of the matter from
the beginning:
In 1872, the first year of the Colony,
there was no hall nor building i'll Wor-
Ellington suitable for public meetings
or church services. Prof. Humist0n
wrote to Dr.. Miller, his partner, upon
the need of a public Hall. DR.. Miller
promptly answered that if any one
would join him in the building of a
hall he would furnish half the money,
and thus furnish the people building
in which to hold public meetings and
church services. Mr.. Goldschmidt. q
stakeholder in the Sioux City and St.
Paul Railroad, agreed to furnish one
half the necessary means, on DR.. Mil
ler's guaranteeing an income of ten
per cent. on the investment. Accord
ingly the hall was built at u cost, in all,
of nearly $4,000.
About the first of July, 1873, the hall
was sold to the Methodist Episcopal
Church for 81 900, DR.. Miller donating
the remainder, nearly 1000, to the