St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1891-02-03
Hay AGAINST STACK.
The United States Attorney Dis
claims Personal Feeling in the
Contempt Case.

contempt case.
United States District Attorney Hay
yesterday remarked that as usual
thing he did not respond to newspaper
criticism. but he thought an injustice
had been done him by certain state
ments in the papers in connection with
the j. L. Stack contempt case. During
a conversation on the subject with a
GLOBE reporter he said that when
Stack was committed for contempt he
did not know that he had anything
to do with the census cases. and that
it was erroneous to state that he had
taken an interest in the case because
Stack had been connected with the cen-
SuS matters. His connection with the
Stack case was not Influenced by per-
sonal feeling in the least, and he only
gave it such attention as he ordinarily
gives to matters pertaining to his duty.
The first time he remembered seeing
Stack was one of the first days of the
present term of court, when Stack went
to him and told him he was witness in
the census cases and wanted TO know.
how soon he could be excused. He was
referred to Mr.. Baxter, and Mr.. Hay
thinks he showed him into the inner
Office where Mr.. Baxter was. Mr.. Hay
said he did not know then, or until he
saw the statement in the Pioneer Press
Saturday, that he was witness in the
Minneapolis or the st. Paul census
cases. Mr.. Hay did not remember hear
ing of him, before the trial of the con-
tempt proceedings, except from the
postoffice authorities, in connection
with the Thompson matter, and all
information concerning him UP to that
time came from the pOStOffice authOri-
ties, and his official action in the prem
iSeS was guided by that information.
The application for the order to show
cause why he should not be punished
for contempt was based upon the in
formation furnished by Miss Quick. A
deputy marshal had the notice to serve
upon him, and went to his Office two
days. At one time he was told at his
Office that Stack had gone to Duluth,
and at another time that he had gone to
Chicago. The deputy marshal then,
hearing that he was in the city.watched
the elevator at the Hotel Windsor the
night before the order committing for
contempt was issued, but Stack did not
90 there. On the day of the hearing
Mr.. Stack went to Mr., Hays Office and
stated that he heard he was looking for
him. Mr.. Hay stated that the marshal
was looking for him. Mr.Stack wanted
to make an explanation, but as
Mr.. Hay was very busy with the
grand jury and court, he told him
he would have to go into the court room
to explain the matter to the court, and
said he would call the matter up the
first thing. He went into the court room,
where he was pointed out to the mar
shall by Mr.. Hay and was served with
notice to show cause why he should not
l,f, pIch EOr,
was called up, Mr.. Hay examined the
witnesses for the side of the govern
ment and Mr.. White examined the wit
nesses on behalf of Miss Quick and Mr..
Stack. No argument was made to the
court by either Mr.. Hay or Mr.. White.
Judge Thomas saw fit to punish both
Mr.. Stack and Miss Quick for contempt.
In regard to the statement by Mr.. Stack
that Mr.. Hay had asked that the order
for rehearing be- changed to an order
to show cause why rehearing should
not be issued, Mr.. Hay said that an
order for rehearing had been served
upon HIM, and when he stated
to Judge Thomas that an order
for a rehearing had been served
upon him the court stated that he
suppose that it was an order to show
cause that he had signed when pre-
scented by Mr.. Stacks attorney. and he
directed the order to be changed. MIR.
Hay stated that he offered no atfidavits
in opposition. and permitted the rehear-
ing to be ordered without opposition.
When the rehearing was had the same
witnesses were examined and the same
state of facts as on the former hearing
was presented. Mr.. Hay emphatically
disclaimed personal feeling against
Mr. Stack and stated that he had only
done his duty as he understood it.