The Sauk Centre herald. (Sauk Centre, Stearns County, Minn.) 1886-current, 1896-03-05
HOWARD vINDICATED.
Our John Did Not Attempt to
Corrupt a Jury.

49, - JsAAJs
As was expected, an investigation in
to the facts relative to the charge that
]. R. Howard had at tempted to corrupt
Juror. shows conclusivelv that there
was no foundation for this charge. 1t
was bro ought for the purpose OF coercing
or Matchmaking the Great Northern in
to making liberal settlement OF dam
age srit. The Minneapolis Tribune of
Sunday says:
AT the last term of the Wright county
court, held at Buffalo, there was tried
damage suit in which Mathew Czech
was plaintiff and the Great Northern
Railway Company defendant. The
plainti was represented by Frank D.
Larrabee and Frank E. Latham; the
former well known damage suit at
torney of this city, and the latter resi-
dent of Buffalo. The defendant in the
case was represented by w. E. Dodge,
the well known local attorney of the
Great Northern, aud Wendell & Pigeon,
of Buffalo. The injuries which plaintiff
received were claimed by plaintiff to be
very serious, and the amount OF dam
ages asked was $4,000.
The case was holly contested one both
on questions of law and fact, but was
finally submitted to the jury, who, after
some elaboration, returned verdict of
$4,000 for the plaintiff. The plaintiffs
attorneys were sorely disappointed at
the amount of the verdict, and were
quite free in their charges that the re-
suit was due entirely to some undue in
f1uence exerted upon a certain one of
the jurymen by representatives OF the
defendant. It turned out. as I, matter
of TACT, that one Otis Billings had spoken
to one of the jurymen, man named
Ernest Otto, during the trial, and char
ges were Immediately made, openly and
secretlv, by the attorneys for the plant
Tiff that the small amount of the verdict
| was the direct result Of this interview
between Billings and the juryman, Otto,
and that this interview was brought
about at the instigation of Attorney
Dodge and Claim Agent Howard. OF the
Great Northern.
About this time Attorney Larrabee
appeared with an affidavit purporting
to be signed and sworn to by Juryman
Otto, that during the trial he had been
approached by Billings and offered 81 90
to hang the jury" The alleged afida-
| Wit Of Otto also stated that Billings
told Otto that the 500 would be paid
after the disagreement OF the jury, or
after a verdict for the defendant, and
that Billings had undertaken to see Otto
for a consideration of $25 to be paid
him by Dodge and Howard. Another
affidavit which at the same time Mr..
Larrabee claimed TO be genuine and to
contain statement OF facts, was an af
fdavit executed by Billings himself stat
! that he had made the offers to Otto at
the solicitation and request of Attorney
Dodge and Claim Agent Howard.
The first that the public knew of these
charges was when few DAYS ago At
torney Larrabee attempted to have Col.
Dodge and Claim Agent Howard indie
ted by the Hennepin county grand jury
for alleged bribery. What went on in
the grand jury room is not known.
But the result was that the grand jury
found no bill against either Col. Dodge
or Howard, but few days subsequent
returned an indictment for perjury
against Billings. The true state of af-
fairs has never been made known, until
it was disclosed in a hearing before
Judge Elliot, in which Larrabee asked
for new trial of the Czech case, on the
ground that the small verdict obtained
was in trial in which the attorney and
claim agent of the defendant and infiu-
enced one of the iuryman. The motion
of Attorney Larrabee was based entire
~ upon the affidavit of Billings, and
upon the alleged affidavit of Juryman
Otto, which is above referred to. After
reading these two afidavits, which At
torney Larrabee assured the court were
genuine, Attorney Dodge presented the
counter afidavits in opposition to the
motion for a new trial. These affidavits
were in substance as follows;
Jurymau Otto's affidavit;
''Drring the trial one Billings came to
me and stated that If 1 would hang the
| Jury he corld get me some money; have
known Billings for about went, years.
HIS reputation for truth and veracity
and honesty is very bad, and l would
not believe him on oath. therefore did
not believe him when he made his state
ment. 1 was not influenced thereby.
but, as a matter of fact, voted for the
highest amount of any ofthe jurors, and
was the last one to consent to as low
verdict as So 900. In his conversation,
Billings did not mention the names OF
anv persons whom he claimed to repre-
sent. After recitine to Mr.. Larrabee
the facts as above, he (Larrabeel pre-
pared an affidavit which he assured me
contained the facts as above stated,
with the understanding that 1T was to
Il IL 4,