The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1893-08-02
THE FARLEY SUITS.
How the Bonds were Acquired
from Holland Holders.

from Holland Holders.
Manipulating Legislatures and
Muzzling the Press.
By JOHN H. BURKE.
The lines and property of the ST..
Paul & Pacific companies passed to
Hill and the Manitoba in June, 1879,
and the same month Farley COM
menced action in the state courts,
making serious charges against Hill
and his associates, in relation to the
acquisition of the line and the bonds
held by the Hollanders.
To this action and it's charges no
denial was ever entered by Hill, but
he interposed a demurrer. which all
lawyers know admits the truth of the
charges at least so far as the pro-
ceedings have gone.
Later an action was commenced in
the United States court, and again
Mr.. Hill failed to make any denial,
though he did file plea which among
other matters set up an averment
that Farley had never informed the
bondholders or Kennedy, their agent,
of his (Farley's) interest in the pur-
chase of the bonds.
The case was heard, decided in 4
McCrary, appealed to the supreme
court, and the latter court, in 12O
U. S. 316, find "by the evidence of
Farley and letter of Kennedy" that
Kennedy, who was the agent of the
bondholders, "knew Farley was to
have an interest in the project
hence the statement in Hill's plea to
the reverse thereof was untrue.
The case having been remanded by
the o.. S. supreme court to the circuit
court, the time had come when Mr..
Hill and his associates could not Ion
ger delay admitting or denying their
completely, and in June, 1887, an an
swer is filed denying the charges, and
this after eight gears of delay and
bubble.
The case was heard before Judge
Brewer and decided in favor of Mr..
Hill, despite the fact that Hills I'M
supported statements and denialS,
were refuted by two witnesses; while,
as seen above, the supreme court Of
the United States had found that Mr.
Hills sworn statements were not al
ways reliable. See 12O U. S. and 80
Federal. All these facts, when coup
led with the fact that Clough, one Of
the first attorneys for Farley against
Hill, is, and for years has been, en-
ployed by and an officer of the Mani
toba and Great Northern, are strange
links of circumstantial evidence to
join together to prove Hills entire
innocence.
The decision, in 80 Fed. admits that
perjury has been committed, yet pro-
vides all the parties to the case with
certificates of high moral character,
instead of issuing a warrant for the
arrest of someone.
HOW THE BONDS WE'RE ACQUIRED.
At page 319 of the argument Hill's
attorney admits "That as early 1877"
it was determined that Mr.. Hill
should interview" certain parties
named, about disposing of their hold
ings; and by exhibit 80, dated Jan.
II, 1879, it appears that Hill and his
associates did buy off, for $500, 900,
certain of their strong opposition;
that is, they bought certain securi-
ties at an agreed price.
On Feb. 10, '78, Mr.. Hill writes:
"While writing have just received
your telegram to effect of Northwes-
tern making opposition in Holland,
and at once telegraphed Mr.. Hughitt,
Chicago: I'VE have assured our
friends we would have no opposition
from Northwestern, which was con-
frmed by Mr.. Porter. We depend
upon your Immediate action with
drawing all opposition to us, as the
best interests Of aU,' and got reply from
Mr.. Keep, the president of the COM
pany: Hughitt in New York; have
sent copy to Porter, advising him to
telegraph Amsterdam. I think you
are mistaken, as any opposition from
our friends in Holland" Hill Elk. 1923.
HITS TESrTMONy
Mr.. Hill in his testimony, in speak
ing of certain proceedings, says: sour
object in doing that was to destroy
the market for the bonds in Amster-
dam to drive these local par
ties out of the market and in that
way depress the value of the bonds.
** Our object was to get control
and possession of the property at as
low a price and for as little money as
we could And in speaking of GER