St. Paul daily globe., 1891-12-05
TIM BYRNES' FENCES.
They Need Mending as Badly
as Those OF the Republi-N
can Party.
His Real Estate Transactions
Brought to the Attention.
Of the G. j.
Pergstrom Corroborates Mr.
Tweedie'S Evidence ReIa-
tive to the Pumps.
Arrest Of j. H. Hanscom's AS
Co;1ooA1 E;P%,, Ponc o-1
Arrest Of j. H. Hanseom's AS
SailantS--Fifty-four, and
Wants a Divorce.

Timothy r. Byrnes, the pride or the
Republican party in Minnesota, is in
danger. The grand jury is investigat-
ing one of his little ''real estate deals,;'
and something like an indictment is apt
to be the result. Mary A. Goodrich and
her husband, George w. Goodrich,
spent considerable time in the grand
jury room yesterday. A few minutes
fter they entered the room meSsen-
ger from the register of deeds office
carried lot OF record books
into the room. These books proved to
be the ones containing The records of
certain real estate transactions between
NJ. Byrnes and Mrs. Goodrich. While
the GOodrichS were in the room num-
Der of the grand jurors appeared at
window and examined some papers very
carefully. They held the papers up TO
the light and looked at them as if they
expected to discover signs of eTasureS
and alterations. Just what they discov-
cred is a secret for the present 1t
was very evident. however, that the
jury was investigating the old
case of Mary A. Goodrich against
Timothy L. ByrDes. ElwOOd s. COrsor
and The David c. Bell Investment Com
pany. Although the case has been in
not succeeded in getting it to trial yet.
The particulars of the case, as pub
liShed below. throw some significance
upon the actions of the grand jury yes
terday.
The plaintiff. Mrs. Mary A. Goodrich.
in her complaint which was filed Dee.
81 1890, claims that she was the owner
of seventeen lots Of land situate in Hen
nepin county. July s, 1887, she sold the
same to Timothy f. Byrnes for the az
gresate sum of $4,000, and the same
were duly conveyed by her and George
w. Goodrich, her husband, to ByrneS.
AS security for the purchase
money Byrnes executed seventeen
separate mortgages and also gave
his several seventeen promisSOry notes,
bearing Interest at per cent per an
nun payable half-yearly. All were
dated at an even date, and the DrOmiS-
sorry notes were TO fall dne on July ,,
1892. The mortgages were duly recorded
on the county file. The plaintiff then
states that before the making OF such
mortgages she and her husband gave
ByrneS a general power of attorney to
act for them and deal with the SAID lands
as he might see fit. This was also
recorded in the register of deeds
Office. But on Oct. u OF same
year QSSO plaintiff states she and her
husband cancelled and revoked the said
power Of attorney. Attached to this was
blank form Of acknowledgment. which
BYrneS in his capacity of notary public
was Ia fill out and immediately file for
record. This he failed to do as agreed
Oct. -, 1887. it is claimed Defendant
ByrneS, without the consent or knoWl-
edge of the plaintiff. signed and exc
cuted a pretended satisfaction of the
mortgage upon the lots as attorney
in fact, and that he, on the same
day. also without the knowledge or
consent of the plaintiffs filed a pretended
instrument OF satisfaction in the Office
Of the register OF deeds, when in truth
and fact none of the mortgages men,
toned in the alleged spurious paper,
nor the notes accompanying the sane,
had been ever paid or satisfied. A few
| days after, desiring to procure loans of
| money for his own use upon mortgage
| securities to he made 10y himself, it is
| claimed he falsely represented that he
could sell two of the lots TO people who
would improve them with valuable i'm
| prOvementS.
He asked plaintiff to execute satisfac-
| ton of the two mortgages. which, be-
| llevipg she would receive the money
| therefor, she consented TO DO. After
these were executed and delivered it is
| alleged that Byrnes falsely altered the
| instruments SO as TO make the descrip-
ton include eight more lots, tallving
with those purpOrting to be satisfied by
the aforementioned instrument of salts
| faction. Also, by making other eraS-
ureS and alterations TO conform in ap-
| pearance to the changes made by him.
On Jan. so following Byrnes negoti-
ated a loan with w. AmeS for Sl2, 900 for
his own use, and for the purpose of pre-
| tended security ByrneS and his wife ex-
| ecuted to AmeS a mortgage on portion
! of the lots, which was recorded Feb g,
| following. This mortgage was after
wards assigned to Lucia Pratt Ames.
| These mortgages were fOrcloSed Dec 9,
| two of the lots being sold at public auc.
| ton to Winfield w. Bardwell. On Jan.
| II certificate for this sale was assigned
to the DAVID &. Bell Investment COM
| pany.
Oihcr loans were made in a similar
manner. One from ElWood S. CorSer
| for $4,000. These were foreclosed in
| the same manner, CorSer himself being
! the purchaser.
1t is also alleged that the instruments
| of satisfaction upon lots IL was not
| filed until the Sth day of February, 1888.
| on the same day the mortgage of Byrnes
and wife to AmeS was filed for record,
| and that those on lots TO Z and lot Is
was not fled for record until the 10Th
| of January. 1889, being the same dav
| that the mortgage of Byrnes and wife
! to COrSer was filed.
Plaintiff alleges that default has been
made in the conditions of the mortgages,
falsely released, and declares that the
notes and principal are due and paya-
bic. Wherefore the plaintiff asks that
! the pretended forged Instruments be
declared null and void. and that the
claims of Corser and the Bell Invest
ment company be declared subsequent
| 10 the lions of nlaintifT'S mnri rarns