Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1897-10-20
A PERJURY CHARGE.
More Trouble for the Attorney !
Whom Judge Fish Recent
ly DiSbarred.

barred by Judge Fish, has been arrested
on a charge of perjury, preferred against
| him in the Waupaca county circuit court.
| Sheriff NJ. L. Munsert of Waupaca
county appeared at the central police sta
ton early this morning and handed to
| Inspector Riemer a warrant issued in
Waupaca county, calling for the arrest Of
| Goldberg. Detective Koeller was de-
tailed to look up the disbarred attorney
and in a short time returned to the sta
| ton having him in custody. The officer
found him in the Pabst building. Gold
| berg was accompanied to the station by
| Attorney Edward Mock. At the sta ton
| Sheriff MunSert was waiting and when
| the detective and the attorney arrived
| the sheriff greeted Goldberg and taking
| aim to one side informed him that he had
| a warrant for his arrest on a charge of
| perjury. Goldberg laughed heartily when
| told of the charge and appeared to think
| the matter a good joke.
Taken TO Waupaca.
He was booked on the police blotter at
the central station and then turned over
to the sheriff, who Immediately left the
station with his prisoner. The two went
directly to the law offices of G.. w. Eel
ker in the Pabst building and while the
sheriff waited in the reception room.
| Goldberg was closeted with Attorney
Felker for an hour or more. 1t lacked
| 4 few minutes of the time of departure
| of the train leaving this city at 12:01
o'clock on the Wisconsin Central for
Waupaca when the pair left the office
and hurried to the depot
| The warrant was issued on complaint
of d. G. Ware of Waupaca. The charge
| relates to the trial of a suit in that court
| two years ago in which G. A. Finster-
valid was the plaintiff and B. S. Peterson
| the defendant.
| a.
| wentworth was produced as witness
for the defendant and testified that
| Goldberg was a. livery stable
| in New London, kept by Burr &
Zahl, on the night of April Is,
1895. Goldberg, when called as wit
ness in this suit, denied emphaticaIly that
he was in New London that night and
detailed how he had left New London
that afternoon, returned to Waupaca and
| left that city at O'Clock the same even
ing for Clintonyille, where he remained
until Sunday. He states that he heard
of the matter only after his return. The
complaint alleges that this testimony was
| false and untrue and that Goldberg we'll
knew the livery stable mentioned and was
there on the nigth of April Ii. giving di
rections to the teamsters and ordering
them how to proceed in removing goods
| from a store.
What Goldberg Says.
"You may say that it is in line with the
prosecution that have been subjected to
| by some of the members of the bar OF
| Waupaca county" said Mr. Goldberg
shortly before the train pulled out of the
sworn to by d. C.. Ware, an enemy of
mine. Thorne was in Waupaca yester-
| day consulting with the district attorney,
| SO that it is easy to see who drew the
| warrant and how it came to be issued.
| Not content with that. he told the sheriff
| WIN ha tn N
me, to go to the police station first ;.Ad
| get detective, because, ne said. Gold
| berg will run if he sees you coming
Just as soon as the train reached Wau-
paca at Alb o'clock Goldberg was taken
| to a magistrates Office and released on
bond furnished by Moses d. Newald of
this city and David Hammel of Apple
| ton. Mr.. Ncwald accompanied the pris-
oner from Milwaukee and Mr.. Hammel
came down from Appleton to join the
party at Neeaah At Mr.. Goldberg's re-
quest the case was adjourned until one
week from Monday to October %.
Figured in the Disbarment Case.
The warrant is based upon the decis-
ion of Judge Fish on the fourteenth
charge in the disbarment case 1t was
| the finding of the court on this count
| that proved the greatest surprise to
! Goldberg and his attorneys. The
charge grew out of replevin action
| brought by C.. A. Finsterwald against
| B.. S. Peterson. Finsterwald was a
brother-in-law of Goldberg and was in
partnership with Goldberg's mother in
store at Marion. One Of the issues was
a question of fraud in the purchase of
stock of goods at New London from one
SieZaw by Finsterwald. On the even
| ing of April 13, 1895, Goldberg obtained
| judgment note from F'insterwald in
| favor of his mother and levied on the
ST Hhn l. ,1e,cc A.
| tached by creditors of Siezaw. The de-
| tails of the matter are that on the trial
| Melvin Wentworth testified that on the
evening of April II, 1894, Goldberg
came into the livery barn which he had
| charge of at New London and ordered
| two teamSters who had charge of teams
| which appeared to be loaded with goods
to be sure and get out before daylight
Goldberg took the stand and denied the
| testimony. He also testified that on that
evening he drove himself from Waupaca
| to Clntonville, with his own team. and
that one Will Vosburg did not go with
him from Waupaca to- New London
This testimony WAS claimed to have been
false.
Judge Fish's Finding.
| judge Fish, in his decision, goes into
| the charge very exhaustively and sets
forth in detail much of the evidence. In
| summing up the court stated that the
| testimony was clear that William OS-
| burg was with Goldberg when he drove
to Lipke's barn on the night of April
| IA, 1894. Finsterwald testified i'll ex-
PLANTATION, but of him Judge Fish said:
This testimony of Finsterwald is so
! palpably false as to stamp the whole
story as to Goldberg's going to his house.
and waking him up and drive over to the
| barn, "as a mere subterfuge to account
| For the presence of another man at Lip
'le's barn and to avoid Wentworth's testi-
nony. Further comment is unneces-
ary," the court continues, upon this
testimony. The clear preponderance of
the evidence is that the respondent Gold
berg, and viii Vosburg drove from Wau-
paca to New London together that night.
and that Goldberg had the conversations
with the transfers as detailed by the
witness Wentworth; and therefore testi-
fed falsely upon the trial of the action
Of Finsterwald against Peterson
It is upon this charge that the appeal
Of Goldberg, now being drawn, is based
largely, together with exceptions to the
findings in the other charges The de-
PENDANT and his attorneys were very con-
ident that the Supreme court would not
| hos itNto il1O I'll. u