Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-06-17
THE IMPEACHMENT.
8nIEk, BUT IMPORTANT PROCEED
INGS.

yesterday and business was commenced prompt
ly at $50 by recalling
ANDRDw KNOX,
who testified as to the proceedings Of that 1877
grand jury. Was very friendly with 1ngmund-
son up to that grand jury, but he has refused
to recognize me since that time.
W. H. DEAN
resides at Rose Creek, Mower county. Have
been acquainted with Mr.. 1ngmundson four or
five years. Heard a conversation in Mr.. Ing
mundson's Office in the spring Of 1876 about the
town of Clayton order. He was asked why he
did not settle with the town, and Ingmundson
said because the town would not take the order
he had. The man then told Ingmundson that
Mr.. Coleman said the order had been paid, and
Ingmun dson said he didn't care a damn, the
town wouldn't get settlement until the order
was allowed.
JUDGE PHELPS,
chairman Of the county board for the years
covered by the Ingmundson matter, again took
the stand. The auditing board of the county
commissioners advertised for bids for deposits
of county funds, but bids were received.
knew that Ingmundson was depositing funds
in the banks. Never told him that he could SO
deposit. Had nothing to do with it.
A. G. TANNER,
another of the county commissioners, said it
known by the commissioners that Ing
nundson was depositing county funds in the
Austin banks, but no such authority was granted
by the board.
W. II. PAGE
cashier of the First National bank of Austin
since its organization in 1868. Ingmundson
had an understanding with the First National
and Mower county banks at Austin. and the
bank at LIE Roy, for deposit Of funds. This
understanding had before the board
advertised for bids. Ingmundson want
cd the money divided up, and in accordance
with the understanding the banks put in no
annum monthly balances. No bonds were
given the county or Mr.. Ingmundson.
W. L. coRBETT
lives in the town of Marshall, Mower county,
and was another member OF the March, 1877,
ter was sworn, stating that the grand jury of
1876 had examined the town of Clayton matter
and exenerated him, and gave me to under
stand that Judge Page was pushing the inves-
tlgatlon against him without cause. He also
said he did not want to be indicted.
HENRY BAaLEY
was a member Of the petit jury at the Septem-
Der term, 1876. At that time Mr.. Ingmundson
said to us: "Boys: take off your hats to the
ID old devil or he'll have you fined.
THOMAS F. STEVENS,
lawyer, but has not practised much in Mime
sofa. Was in court when the Stimson court
was up before Judge Page. It was Satur-
day evening. No evidence was taken. Judge
Page was talking to Mr.Stimson about the case.
He told Stimson he did not think he had been
instigated to his course by malice, but had
been drawn into it by designing parties. l did
not hear him mention the name of HARDWOOD and
Others in connection with the Younger brothers,
or make any threat of any kind. When the case
was adjourned that day Judge Page stated he
had to go to Preston Monday, SO the case would
have to be held over until his return.
d. w. Lowell
resides at Austin and is a lawyer Was at the
examination of the Stimson case before Judge
Page in Chambers. Heard the Judge mention
the name OF the Younger brothers, but the names
Of HARDWOOD, French, ct al, were not mention
ed in the same connection.
A. j. HUNT
resides at Brownsville, and is member Of the
bar; was in attendance upon court when Mr..
Greenman was called to take a case for Mr.
French. The attorneys were tardy, and Judge
Page spoke to them saying they would facili-
tate business by being more prompt. When
the criminal case was called French was absent
and the Judge called Mr.. Greenman to take the
case until Mr.. French returned. When French
came in, MI. Greenman turned the case over tt
him at once. Did not hear the judge say any
thing about Furnishing French for contempt
Did not hear the judge speak to French about
his loud talk, and to go out of the room, and
don't think any such remarks were made.
On the cross-examination, Mr.. Hunt showed
a very Imperfect memory as to the proceedings
in court at that time, other than testified il
his direct, even being unable to state the tern
OF court nearer than two or three years ago.
THE FIFTH ARTICLE.
At this point Mr.. Davis announced that will
the exception of a single document not now i,
court, respondent had put in all the testimon.
he thought he should be compelled to present
But still there remains his underlined status a
to the fifth article and specification three of tn
tenth article. These relate to a riot in Austin
growing out of which the judge wrote the lette
to George Baird sheriff. embodied in the article
and from which it is attempted t.
show malice. From all that has been show,
the letter was private communication t.
Sheriff Baird, without anything about it indi
eating that it was intended for publication
and it only saw light through the act of tn
party to whom it was written. How such al
act can be twisted into showing malice, is har
to conceive and either that article and specif
cation ought to be withdrawn, or else respond
ent ought to be permitted to go on and prov
all connected with that affair. We therefor
renew the motion to quash.
Mr.. Clough did not know as the managers de
sired to say anything more on the real questio
than had already been said. The Senate ha
already decided the matter as to quashing tn
article. The evidence sought to be introduce
was clearly inadmissable, what happened on
Saturday night having nothing to do with til
act of respondent the following Monda
in his communication to an officer intended t
brow-beat and humiliate that officer. But tn
will to will all 0hi
lions, simply demanding the right to introdue
rebutting evidence, it it should be decided t
go into that Saturday night riot.
Mr.. Davis reargued the question briefly an
was replied to by MIR. Clough VII
took the Position tbt conr that was the to r d
eide whether argument should be reopened
the motion to quash, and as if such motto
was entertained he should desire to be hear
upon the matter.
Manager Gilman suggested that article fl,
and specification three did not necessari]
stand or fall together.
Mr.. Vest will ask of Gov. Davis if spec
fcation three has any bearing on charge ten.
Mr. Davis-Pshaw. l supposed that tn:
article had died in giving birth to the title
(Laughter.)
Upon the motion of Senator Nelson the cou
went into secret session, to consider the ma
ter.
THE DIVISION.
Upon reassembling, the president announce
that the court had decided to override the M
ton to duash, but had voted to receive no tie
tilnony upon article five and specification tire
except that respondent, if he so desired, cou
be sworn as to what took place between hi
and Sheriff Baird-the conversation covered t
specification three. In accordance with the
cision,
JUDGE PAGE
took the stand and testified to the conversatit
with George Baird the Sunday following Il