The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1893-11-23

CiOu, anu the COuTI dcteu upon tHo
facts as true, when they were but will
fully and wrongfully forged.
The second indictment accuses Mr..
Madigan of the crime of perjury. The
case in which this is alleged to have
been done was that of Peter A. Ramnes
VS.. Halvor T. Helgeson and Ole II.
Mogen, co-partners as Helgeson &
Mogen, doing a mercantile business at
Belview up to early this year, when
they assigned. 1t appears that Mr..
Madigan induced the partners to sign
note for $500 alleged to have been
given to Peter A. Ramnes. This was
on April 27, 1892. 1t is alleged that
Immediately after it was given Mr..
Madigan commenced suit on the note
to force an assignment. The complaint
was drawn up and sworn to before
George Houghmaster, Court Commis-
sioner, by Mr.. Madigan.' The indict-
ment claims that the firm was never
indebted to Ramnes; that the note
was never delivered to him, and that
besides Mr.. Madigan knowing that his
affidavit to the complaint was false, he
was never attorney for Rames.
The third indictment is for forgery
in the second degree, accusing Mr..
Madigan of having wilfully forged
and feloniously forged an instrument
purporting to be the act of Peter N.
Ramnes, F. w. Philbrick and Henry
F. Buechner to a bond for a writ of
attachment on the stock of Helgeson
& Mogen, Belyiew. The bond was
for $3.50, and the name of Ramnes was
placed on the same, according to the
indictment, without such person know
ing of the procedure. This, of course,
is the snme case on which the second
indictment was found.
The fourth indictment is for bribery
probably the gravest charge. The
crime is alleged to have been commit
ted on May 2, 1892. The case really
commenced on Nov. 13, 1891, when
complaint was made to the Municipal
Court of the City of Redwood Falls
that one Andrew Peterson, residing
west of the city, was charged with the
crime of criminal assault. Peterson
was arranged and held to the grand
jury on bail. The bail was furnished.
On May 2, 1892, or just before the op-
ening of the May term of court the
| grand jury accuses Mr.. Madigan of
asking for and receiving from Peter
son bribe and reward for emitting
the performance of his official duties,
in prosecuting Andrew Peterson, the
understanding being that if the charge
of criminal assault should be brought
up,he, Mr.. Madigan, would use his in
fuence, by reason of said bribe and
gratuity, to prevent as far as he could
the finding of an indictment. The
grand jury accu:es Mr.. Madigan of
having received bribe of $500 from
Peterson for this service, the amounts
divided as follows: Forty dollars in
cash at that time; one note for $3.50,
payable to NJ. Murphy, or bearer, the
note being falsely dated March "a,
1892, and made payable ten days after
that date, and another note for $500,
falsely dated March II, 1892, made
payable to J. Sampson on or before
Nov. 1st, 1892. These notes we're de-
livered to and accepted by Mr.. Madi-
gan, and Mr.. Peterson was never in
dicted.
! Mr.. Madigan has secured ex-Senat-
or H. J. Peck, of Shakopee, one of the
most eminent jurists in the State, to
conduct his defense in the indictments,
and on Monday morning, a telegram
was produced from the Senator, ask
ing that the cases be continued until
Tuesday morning, before pleas we're
entered. The continuation was grant
ed by Mr.. Pierce.
Tuesday morning H. j. Peck ap-
peared for the defendant. Mr.. Peck
at once stated that he proposed to en-
ter plea of "Not Guilty" but would
not consent to trial at this term. Mr..