Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1882-01-25

lumber Office, where court was being held.
CrOss-eXamined- Shortly after noon l saw
Judge Cox in the court room, which under
stood to be special term of court; an argu-
ment was in progress in case OF supplement
tary proceedings, which resulted in discOv-
cry of an error in the sheriff Is return; his
general appearance at 8 o'clock was quite diff
ferent from that at IL IN.
JOHN A. HUNTER
sworn. Was sheriff Of Lyon county in 1878;
recollect the case of Cleveland Stove company
at the November term of 1878; amended my
return and the case was continued in the even
ing; from my acquaintance with Jurge Cox
before and since l should say that "COx was
very much under the influence of liquor" l. G.
"drunk." First knew Judge Cox in 1877,
when he was running for the Office of Judge.
Article XVIII-Saw Judge Cox in May and
June, 1881, drunk.
sworn. Am hotel keeper at Marshall, Lyon
county. State if you have seen Judge Cox
drunk or sober, when and where?
Answer-At special term May and June,
1881. In May he came on the O'Clock train
and wanted room, at which time he was I'M
der the influence of liquor; very frequently
| frequenting the saloons. After closed the
hotel in the evening Cox tried to get into the
house. ! let him sleep outside in chair till
about o'clock in the morning, at which
up'' and during the forenoon he was pretty
drunk. Don't know where he spent the even
| ing other than an inference from his converse
| tiOn at the time.
Objection was here raised by respondents
council to this evidence being taken. After
| being taken it was voted to strike out the
name of Mrs. Brown, a supposed place OF Ill
repute which respondent had expressed an in
| tention to visit together with the barkeeper.
He was at my place at the June term, and
| intoxicated about two weeks, remained at my
house drunk during the day and also at night;
while stopping at my house he incurred a
whisky bill of SIT in ten days, which he
promptly paid; saw him in 1879 when he de-
| livered q temperance lecture at the Methodist
| church, in that town, when he was pretty
drunk during the June term the first day
he frequented the saloon about
once an hour; same second day;
he drank, sometimes whisky, sometimes gin.
| State as to other times? While I was board
er at the hotel, saw him frequently. Saw him
only once sober, and that was after the June
| term, 1881.
Cross examined-At the time I got up to
| let Judge Cox in, saw him outside pretty
| drunk, he was in STOPPING position; he went
and sat down in chair, or reached around and
was loose and ''swaggy." heard him at the
door at Q in the morning; can't say whether
Cox remained in the chair all the time.
Did you not testify in the original investi-
cation that he went to bed sober? now say
he walked up to his room; had no talk with
| him; he went direct to his room.
The witness now denies and says he was not
near his court during the May term, which is
directly opposite to his testimony before the
investigation committee.
At the June term he ate no dinner the first
day, but went into the saloon and took drink
and went Immediately to the court loom. l
saw him drink five or six times in the after
noon; he left my house the second evening;
the bill was paid for the two meals he ate at
my house by another person; the liquor bill
referred to was paid sometime during the
term; has been there since June term perfectly
sober; after he left my house at the June term
/ saw him quite frequently.
Will you now testify as you did before the
judiciary committee?
Answer-There was room for few drinks
more. Judge Cox usually invited
two or three with him to drink.
l saw Judge Cox after the December 1S79)
term of court, when his biggest drunk was
had, and know that it was the next day
after he delivered the temperance lecture and
he was very drunk at my house; one of the
table walters refused to wait on him at the
dinner table on account of the vulgar Ian
guage used. In the year 1880, sometime in
August or September, he drank quite good
many times, both at my house and at John
Lautenschlaeger's.
Counsel Arctander, after interrogating the
witness as to his former residences previous to
Marshall, traced it from New York to Illinois
and Iowa; he positively denied that he had
been arrested in New York for forgery, or had
been arrested at DEBORAH, Iowa, for horse
stealing, or gave bail, skipped the town
and his bondsman followed him to Marshall
and forced him to repay him 81 900.
presented the following resolution: That
hereafter no witness called to testify under
article XVIII. shall be permitted to testify to
any other article unless he is one of the five
selected by counsel Yeas %, nays 1.