St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1896-02-21
Plea Made by Attorney Huba-
chek.
Not one red cent .

and only Mr. Healy there among the
interested parties. Mr. Blethen and
his friends had not had time to get re-
| freshments and return to the room
before it was all over. It came sc
quick and sharp, that Mr.. Healy forgot
to ask for the customary stay. The
verdict was as follows:
State of Minnesota, County of Hennepin-
SIS. Alden j. Blethen, plaintiff, VS.. Thomas
Lowry, defendant-Verdict: We, the jury in
| the above-entitled action, find for the de-
PENDANT. s. G. Palmer Foreman
There had been a counter claim Of
$4,000 put in by the defense as Judge
! Koon had said more as matter OF
| form, and that counter-claim the court
had ruled out, so the matter was a
! simple one to settle. The jury only
that they had talked about the case
until they saw there was no dispute
! and then the ballot was cast
| HUBACHEK'S CLOSING PLEA.
The sad news which reached County
Attorney Nye last evening so unnerved
| him that he was not able to continue
his argument, and Frank r. Hubachek
was selected to take his place. Mr.
Hubachek felt very keenly the disad-
! vantage of being called on at such
short notice to take up Mr.. Nye's argu-
ment; but there was no alternative,
| and ne was forced into the vacancy by
stress Of circumstances.
The speaker stated that it had been claimed
| by the defense ridiculous for Mr.. Lowry
to have agreed to pay the debts Of the paper
and give d sum over that debt, when he did
not know what the debts were. AS matter
| OF fact, the two men had talked over and
! written over the matters so much that Mr.
| Lowry knew much about the affairs and
debts of the paper as did Mr.. Blethen him
! SELF In fact, Mr.. Lowry himself should have
been able to make a list Of debts as well as
| Mr.. Blethen.
A very strong point was made of a claim
that the reason why Mr.. Lowry had never
made any open statements in his letters to
the effect that he was connected with the
paper was because such q state of things IL
1T became known, would have been a sword
to be used against him in his battle for the
franchises in Minneapolis and st. Paul. Yet
1t did come to light, and his connection with
1t gave 1t a certain odium with the public.
The speaker argued that on account of that
oolum 1t became necessary that q new man
or the paper would be entirely lost, and so
1t was resolved that Blethen should retire
entirely from the paper.
% The attorney then came down to the date
OF the alleged contract, and the speaker
claimed, as YVES natural. that the story told
by MT Blethen of that interview was rea-
sonable and probable
Inc speaker claimed that the idea Of bank
ruptcy in connection with the Tribune was
absurd. There was not debt thar no not
Deen met when Que, and with that spls. did
properly worth half million, behind the
debts, 1t was absurd to talk of bankruptcy.
From this point the attorney harped upon
| the fact that Mr.. Lowry had not finally sold
the Tribune to the purchasers until later in
t the yeGr, ana tried to make 1t appear that
the relations between the two principals in
the case were fduciary relations, and Mr.
Lowry had wronged such relations when he
mace mace the sale. The claim was made that
MI r n hal 49,
purchase Of the paper, and hence It was a
shahl sale, and one of which Mr. Blethen
was kept in the dark as to its true terms
MI W.T. Blethen supposed until Feb. that the
aeal represented by the first bill of sale had
neen carried out. All the letters carried orr
that idea, and showed that when Mr.. Rletben
maze the horrible discovery when he recejyed
WI Lowry letter to the effect that the sale
nau not been made until afterward then he
was enraged, and then he began TO ash for
ms money, because then only did he discover
now ne mad been duped, and that more
money than he had supposed had heen mode
out of the transfer. iii"ue
Inc speaker went over the various dis.
putes between the parties and the claims
mac IN letters by Blethen. He claimed that
the reason why Blethen suddenly hecama
angry and made demands of Mr. Lowry asl.
ing that he do the right thing by him and
iulnii what promises he had made I'm tho
pas. Wnat ne termed was the real sale of
the property formed the theme for argument
IN which the main feature was the counter,
claim, which the court had decided NOT IN
submit to the jury. He claimed that the
vaiue OF tne property sold was s44SOO, which
Woulo nave allowed Mr.. Lowry to keen bis
promise to Blethen and have profit of sos mn
besides. In closing, the attorney made y
t At mental arithmetic, and asked the Jury
10 mo for various amounts all the wav
from the 100000 asked for in the comnl.int
down to $4,000 in the various events o,,t
nned. Finally. he asked for the value NJ
.i,e equlty IN the property at the time it was
turned over to the last purchaser.
1t was o'clock in the afternoon ba-
fore the attorney had finished his on
gument, and the jury looked more than
renewed when the court wheeled in the
nigh chair, and began the charge.
JUDGES CHARGE
He began by telling the Jury that altboush
the claim was for 500, 00O the alleged contrac,
was but for $4,000 and that was ali that
| could be recovered in any court. There had
b bven IA ereaI amount of evidence submitted
stances corroborative The verdict must he
upon tle actual agreement in order to con-
se tst "a contract the minds of both parties
must have met so that they understood each
other-all the essential details, and if they
did not. then there was no agreement II
MI Lowry did make such agreement and
did finally sell the paper, then the plaintiff
must receive s75, 000 no less and no more 7,
must also be proven that Mr. Lowry not only
made the contract but also made the sale
as "Oii MI. Lowry Chained that he did
make the sale. Mr. Blethen claimed that he
did not only so far as it was necessary for
him to sign the contract and turn over fine
property. N
If the jury found that Mr. Blethen made rho
sale and fixed the terms, then the plaintifr
could not recover. But If the contract was
made and Mr. Lowry did really make the sale
then the verdict should be for the plaintiff
The court did not purpose to go through the
evidence and elucidate it to the Jury excent
in one or two cases. 1t was claimed thai
Mr.. Lowry was interested in buying a naner
that should uphold his interests There was
no evidence as to what Mr.. Lowry's infer
ests were, and the jury had no right tn
take its own knowledge of such matters but
must be governed entirely by the evidence
1t conceded that Mr.. Lowry actually had
no interest in the paper The fact that Mr.
Lowry had signed $150,000 of notes might he
taken into consideration a reason why Mr.
Lowry peculiarly interested in the ma
per and he had right to be interested to
protect his own interests. That was perfectly
| right and proper for any man to do all he
could to protect himself.
The charge was disappointing to the
plaintiff in many ways as was evil
denced by the actions of the attorneys.
Mr.. Healy took exceptions to that part
of the charge in which the court in
structed the jury that they should find
for the plaintiff, if they found that
way, in the sum of $4,000, no more and
no less. The plaintiff had hoped that
there would be an opportunity to COM
promise in the jury room. Exception