St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1884-11-01
j. B. eILLFILLAN's FORTUNE.
How It's Foundation was laid by
WrOnging a Friend.
The Wife of His Victim Driven to In
sanity and Suicide
A Dark Chapter In the Business and PrOfes
sIonal Record Of Would-Be Mem
Der Of COngrQ

hncn man lnTusls nlm6en DcAOIc lic
public as candidate for high Office by
treacherous and shameless intrigue, II is
well calculated TO cast suspicion upon his in
tegrity and his fitness to be
given public trust. J. B. Gil
hIlan, Of Minneapolis, who is put forward
as a candidate Of faction Of the Republican
party for congress, has been proven by an
other faction Of his own party to have secured
the rump nomination by intrigue, fraud and
betrayal Of friends. Under such circum-
stances the question as to his fitness is
largely shorD Of political eonsidera-
tons, and voters feel at liberty
TO consider the personal rather than the po-
litical qualifications Of the respective candi-
dates. 1t is found, therefore. that Mr.. Gil
fllan is repudiated by large numbers of his
own party-in fact that be is personal
and not a political candidate. Even
If he were the unanimous choice Of his
party his fitness would be a proper matter
for consideration, but party zeal might blind
men to his faults which they can now per-
ceiVe.
The development which the GLOBE has TO
make this morning refers to J. b. Gilhllan's
sWindle Of Benjamin o. Cutter, while acting
in the supposed capacity of
friend. Mr.. Cutter was
member Of the firm Of Alden, Gutter q Hull,
architects and builders at Minneapolis. The
firm became financially embarrassed during
the hard times of 1859, and three judgments
we're entered against them. In 1868 Mr..
Cutters health falling him, he went south
with his wife, leaving his affairs 10 be man
aged by Mr.. J. B. Gilhllan, who was trusted
as q friend.
A judgment outlaws in ten years, and this
very good friend proceeded TO aid Mr.. Cutter
by buying up the Judgments, which would
otherwise have outlaWed and relieved Mr..
Cutter Of all liability.
Case file No. 551, of the Court records Of
Hennepin county, show that Comstoek
81 Co. took q judgment on the 22d
Of November, 1859, against the firm
Of Alden, Cutter & Hull for S776.43. In
Mr.. Cutters absence for his health this
judgment was kindly bought by Mr.. Gilfllan
just as II was about to out law, and on the LIST
of September 1869 assigned to John Martin,
the assignment being in Gildllan's handwrit-
ing. He carefully omits any amount in
the assignment paper, but states that 1t was
for Ualua5le consideration. The tell-tale i've
cent revenue stamp attached shows, however,
the consideration TO have been 500 or less.
but in order to make It more oppressive on
Mr.. Cutter, Mr.. Gilfllan kindly computed
the ten years interest making the total bill
to the time he had assigned It 10 John
Martin for valuable consideration, stand as
follows:
Original judgment. .-............. S766 50
Ten years interest. gI2 25
Cost Of execution ............... 2 90
Total amount charged against Cutter. 81 $50 6s
Case file 500, District Court, HennepiI.
county shows judgment obtained by PEN
mock & Hart against Alden, Cutter g.
Hall, Nov. 10, 1859. for S5O9.l5. This too
was kindly bought (for song) by Gilhllan
and assigned to John Martin on Sept. 1,
1869. The assignment was signed by Jo-
seph Pennock for the firm before aInotary in
Allegheny county, Pa. Again there was a
pal,sable consideration and five cent stamp.
One peculiarly of this paper is that the as
signment was originally made to another
name which has been erased and John Mar
tins inserted. The erased name shows that
a letter, probably the letter (, ran below the
line and indicates that it was in Gil
illan's name originally. This as
signment was in Gilfllan's hand
writing and he foots up the bill thus:
Original judgment. .....................S50 $500. Is
Ten years interest. .................... 6l5.44
Cost Of execution. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 800
Total amount charged against Cutter. 81, 1859
Case file No. 1874, district court Hennepin
county, covers the third judgment. This was
obtained for $3.50. sc, March -, 1860, by Side,
Woolford 81 Co., against the firm of which
Cutter was member. 1t was assigned by
Woolford and Blair (the & Co. of the FIRM
to Side for one dollar consideration Sept
4, 1869. This too went 10 John Martin for a
Oal,'abIe consideration, the assignment being
in Gilfllan's hand writing witnessed by
him, and acknowledged by him
as notary. The tell-tale revenue stamps
we're increased to six cents this time, but
still show a mere nominal payment il any
at all. Mr.. Gilfllan figures up against his
friend as follows:
Original judgment. ..................S2 $3.50 SC
Interest. .....-.........-. l3G 40
Cost OF execution. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS. 90
Total amount charged against Cutter. .ss74 o.
The total face value of the judgment was
81, 500. Is, but when Mr.. Gnfnan, acting as
the friend of Cutter and the attorney Of record
of John Martin sold them under the execu-
ton, thu charge against the estate with costs
and interest had risen TO SO, 2S6.5l. They
were accordingly sold to Martin to cover his
claims as follows:
Lot g. block /, ST. Anthony. ..... S2,ST6 81
Lot Z, block /. St. Anthony...... 400 90
Lot S, block /, St. Anthony. 10 DC
Total against Cutter. $3.50 81
The sheriff sold this property under these
executions TO Martin on Oct %, 1869.
Cutter had one year TO redeem but of course
was unable to do SO and on the 23d Of Oct. 1870,
the property became John Martins ALSO
lutely.
On the Slst Of October, 1870, just szea
days after the eg1atgQJ Gutter expired, John
Martin and Jane b., his wife decided
their property TO John d. Gilallan
for TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS. The
deeds recorded in book 81 OF deeds, Henne-
pin county, page $40. John Martin, it will
be noticed, in fit of characteristic go Hber-
ality sold TO Gildllan for $4,000 property
which had cost him 50, 2Ss. 81, If the records
don't lie.
Another little mystery comes in here.
There seems to have been a little talk about
this time, and though Martin decided the
| -. 4 e -