Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-06-27

Congratulated.
The attendance upon the sitting of the inn
parchment court yesterday was little, if any,
less than On the day previous. Among the
members of the legal profession in attendance
were Judges Dillon and Nelson Of the United
States court. Promptly upon the Senate being
called to order Mr.. Davis resumed his argu-
ment for the defense, prefacing his remarks
with the statement that he hoped to complete
the consideration Of the remaining
articles during the day. By the
illness of MIR. Lovely, he said an
unexpected burden had now devolved upon
him, which must be his excuse for any lack of
symmetry and connection in the presentation
of the law and the facts.
THIRD ARTICLE.
Dir. Davis then took up the third, the Mande-
vile article. The gravamen Of the article, he
said, was that Vaudeville was duly appointed a
special court deputy. Second, that respondent
addressed him in unbecoming language. Third,
that respondent refused to issue an order for
pay for services actually performed: and,
fourth, f, T filing his order of appointment as
deputy after the adjournment of court.
By the statutes the judge is to des-
ignate the number and pay Of
deputies, and, failing to issue such
order as claimed by the prosecution, settled the
matter SO far as the sheriff was concerned and
no bill could be held against the county for
services performed in such cases, and the entire
charge fell to the ground. But there was a
legal order issued, and under that order BIZ.
Allen was appointed the deputy, and duly per-
formed the duties of the Office. Respondent
was never informed that Vaudeville was to be
deputy, and he had no way of knowing him
tn hQ hat oorf1 nj
to DISC ualify Mr.. Allen as deputy, that he was
called as witness by Sheriff Hall, in view of
his disgraceful conduct on that oc-
casion, pronounced by Mr., Severance
a farce, Go not help tho case
but rather serve to illustrate the character of
the steal that was being attempted by Sheriff
Hall and his co-conspirators upon the treasury
of Mower county. There was nothing to show
respondent did not act magisterially. He had
to decide the point raised, and he did 80 against
MIR. Vaudeville because his claim was unlaw-
full. If the decision was lawful the feelings
or motives OF respondent are 1mmaterial.
ARTICLE FOUR.
This article charged respondent with order
ing Stimson to pay over certain money with, ut
notice, and threatened him with punish
ment. Stimson was an officer of the court and
bound to preserve its dignity. Miller had been
! fined certain amount for criminal offense,
collection. Under the law, the fine, with the
costs fixed by the court, in criminal prosecu-
ton was all that could be collected of him, and
no officer could retain any portion Of such fine
| collected as his fees. Stimson did retain his
fees from the fine collected from Miller and
| Miller went before the grand jury and COM
planned of the robbery. The grand Jury re.
ported the transaction to the court, who
ordered the fees retained paid over in the pres
ence of the grand jury which brought the at.
tention of the court to the matter. In this
! respondent was doing but his duty-a duty
every district judge III the State had heen com
PEELED to perform. But dis,nissing the ques
ton of law entirely as to fees, the facts were
that this miserable deputy sheriff did nothing
to earn any fees, and the entire proceeding wa.
a petty little steal an embezzlement of State
money-of the school funds of the State;
little, dirty, lousy steal. And now, Senators
is this not a great matter upon which to occupy
the time of the Senate day afte1
day, and to ask that magistrate, against whom
so much as a charge Of pecuniary corruption
has ever been made, shall be socially wrecked
and forever debarred from civil Office. This Ii
all there is Of it. A contemplate steal wal
attempted, which the judge prevented at tn,
same time using no unnecessary harshness, bu
rather showing leniency for Stimson's wrons
doing.
MIR. Davis then referring to article five, tn.
Baird matter said he wished he could be al
distinctly notified by the Senate that it did no
want to hear argument as it had that it would
not receive testimony. He was in doubt hoy
he ought to proceed. It was the first instance
in his knowledge where a complaint had beer
retained in the charge, and the defense not al
lowed to introduce testimony. The charge, i
there is any charge is that responder
had Inundated George Baird, thel
sheriff by writing him Ger
certain letter. AS the letter was privat
epistle, Mr.. Baird must have got it into the i'm
parchment net for the purpose of Matching
out the humiliation. So far as the conduct o
respondent is concerned, his acts were imposed
upon him by the statutes Of Minnesota, whicl
he sworn to enforce The statutes make
judge the head CONSERVATION Of the peace. I,
cases of riot he shall use his authority to dispe
such unlawful assemblies. few men Xix
Sherman Page would have saved the city o
Pittsburgh last year. His act was patriotic, il
the interests of law and order, and worthy 0
commentator, rather than charge of i'm
parchment. The charge, in brief, is damnable
Having concluded consideration of articl
five, the Senate, on motion of Senator Langdon
took a recess to o'clock.