Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1878-03-27

prosecution, and that an execution was placed
in Deputy Sheriff D. h. Stimpson's hands fol
ecution, but that Weller paid $40 to County
| Attorney French, and French turned it over te
Simpson, who retained $3.50 for fees, which
were illegal.
Respondent directed said Simpson, as ar
officer of said court to pay over said money
to the clerk of the court for the us.
of the county; and in 50 doing he
was and still is of the opinion that he adopted
a legal method of correcting an error made by
a ministerial officer of the court, and that the
action of this respondent was in accordance
with the Law. and practice in such cases.
THE WHISKY RIOTS.
Respondent sets forth that on the evening OF
the Both day of May. A. D. 1874, a riot occurred
in the city Of Austin in said county of Mower;
that George Baird, the person named and de-
scribed in said article was the sheriff of said
county and present at said
riot; but that the said Baird, through coward
| ice intimidation and fear of personal vio-
lence, refused and neglected to obey the orders
of the mayor and others, and did not obey
them; and refused and neglected to disperse
said rioters, or to preserve the peace, but was
! completely overcome with fear, and utterly in
efficient as peace officer.
| That notwithstanding the sheriff subse-
quently ordered patrol, the riotous proceed
| ings continued, and on June LIST, 1874, large
| number of noisy and tumultuous persons as
sembled the public square in said city, and
after listening to infammatory speeches and
imbibing freely of liquors, formed in process
sion and marched to the residence of respond
ent, situated on one of the public streets in
said city, and there engaged in noisy and riot
GUS proceedings.
That respondent had left his home that day
to attend term of court in Fillmore county,
and was then holding court: that bis family
| were alone and became greatly alarmed; that
said Baird, whose residence was only few
rods distant, knew of all these facts at the
time but wilfully neglected his duties-made
no efforts whatever to prevent disturbances,
nor to protect the lives and property of citi-
Zens.
Upon being informed by telegram Of the sit
uation respondent wrote the order and letter
to said sheriff. which are set forth in said arti-
Gle, and sent the same to him by mail, and that
this was done to preserve the peace.
THE 1NGMUNDsoN CASE.
Page denies that County Treasurer Ingmund-
son has borne throughout said county, and
among all the citizens thereof, the reputation
of we'll and faithfully performing the duties of
said Office, but alleges that with and among a
great number of the good people of said county
he has been and is both personally, and as a
public officer, person of bad repute, and that
during the period of more than two years last
past, he has been, by a large number of worthy
and reliable citizens of said county, openly
accused of gross violations of law, and gross
offenses in the conduct of the business of said
office; and that he has, during said period,
furnished abundant proof of the same by his
own admissions.
He claims that he instructed the grand jury
to inquire into all cases of official malfeasance,
and alleges that they were prevented from in
vestigating Ingmundson through friendship
and also intimidation.
And respondent further alleges that prior to
said term of court the said treasurer had been
o conduct was in guilty hiy Of said gro ooe m in
thedisobedience of we'll known requirements
of the law, and to such an extent had his mis-
conduct been carried and persisted in that the
public interests were greatly endangered. Re-
spondent instructed the grand jury several
times that they must investigate the matter,
and some Of them said they would find some
way to evade it. They finally returned and
presented a formal statement duly signed by
the foreman, setting forth in substance that
the county treasurer had refused to pay over
money belonging to the town of Clayton when
demanded by the town treasurer unless he
would first pay to him or receive
as money certain orders against
said town which had once
been paid in full by former town treasurer,
and that he had received town orders and dis
bursed funds on them in violation of law,
which said paper was duly filed in said court.
Respondent then instructed the jury that
misconduct of the character represented in the
said statement was an indictable offense, and
if the evidence was sufficient to support the
facts, their duty was clear, and at the same
mo I'M ar cd thor1 hat tho
judges of the evidence and the facts, and the
court had no control over their action; that
they again retired and in short time reported
that they had completed the business before
them.
He felt convinced that it was his duty
to admonish and impress them with the dan
gers and disastrous results that must follow
such conduct, and he thereupon administered
to them temperate rebuke; that in doing so
he used no violent or abusive language and en-
tertained no feelings of anger whatever, but
acted under pure conviction of his duty as a
magistrate.
The grand jury were finally discharged, and
the county attorney was instructed to COM
mence proceedings against Ingmundson, which
he did. Respondent further alleges that at no
time during said March term of court, while
the official acts of said Ingmundson were being
taking place, nor at any other time
were his official acts in any
way influenced modified or controlled
by malice or ill-wiu or other improper or I'M
kind feelings towards said Ingmundson, or by
any desire to injure or degrade or bring into
disrepute among the people of said county or
State, but that in all things done concerning
said case he was prompted and influenced
solely by desire to- discharge his
official duties in a faithful manner
and promote the public welfare.
privately with the members of the grand jury,
and with combining and conspiring with others
to invent, publish, and circulate defamatory
statements relative to him (Page,) as a public
officer. Aud respondent further alleges that
said Ingmundson and his said confederates, for
no other purpose than to protect themselves
and to crafty their personal animosity, have
been largely and chiefly instrumental in pro-
curing the present proceedings against this
respondent.
ABUSING THE GRAND JURY.
To the seventh article he replies that he was
not angry and excited when he discharged the
grand Jury, but he simply discharged his duty
in explaining their illegal conduct.
ASKED TO RESIGN.
In response to the eighth and ninth articles,
he says Deputy Sheriff Simpson circulated the
following:
''To s. Page, Judge of the District Court, Tenth
District Minnesota.
s1R:-Knowing you and believing that your
prejudices are stronger than your sense of
honor; that your determination to rule is more
ardent than your desire to do right; that you
will sacrifice private character, individual in
terest, and the public good to crafty your
malice; that you are influenced by
your ungovernable passions to abuse the
power with which your position interest you to
make it means of opposition rather than ad-
ministering justice, that you have disgraced
the Judiciary of the State, and the voters by
whose suffrage you were elected, therefore, we