The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1898-01-22
SWEARING BLACK IS WHITE.
Another Big Batch Of Contradictory
Affidavits in Durham Case

Yesterday another bunch of affidavits In the
Durham case were filed, both sides taking
part In the game, and careful reading of
them is apt to carry one to the conclusion
that something is very rotten in Denmark.
of course all the parties cannot be telling the
truth. and It is evident that some very tall
prevaricating is being done but in whose in
terest IT Is left to the public and the courts
to decide.
County Attorney Peterson was the first to
reach the office of the clerk of the courts
yesterday, and he had with him a statement
mSde by Francis Campbell, which bears pref
" heavily upon some affidavits introduced
the day before by the defense. Campbell S
aihdavit deals particularly with the state
ment made by William B. Patterson regard
ing the poker game, in which it was alleged
Juror Gardner was allowed TO win connie
OF dollars in order that he might be won
into a humor to vote for Durnam's conyic-
uon. Campbell denies this story in toto He
positively declares that he entered into no
such agreement as was charged, and that no
such game was played
campbell further says that none of the
Jurors, were allowed to wander from the din
ing table at the National hotel into the bar
room, and that of them did So
Camubell also denies the stories as TO
Jurors being allowed to read newspapers CON
tanning accounts of the trial. He saws that
newspapers were furnished the Jurors ONLY
a1ser everything relating to the case had
6een cut therefrom. After the Judge had
oeieyerd his charge even that privilege was
Withdrawn. He takes up the charge made Inv
r. r. Mcclure, to the effect that he (Camp-
De.D mad stated before the trial that all the
aiuermen indicted were guilty and that If
niaced on the jury he would stick till he sent
IneIh TO states prison. and, after denying it.
says that Mcclure had stated to him In the
presence of John R. Godfrey, that he had
never heard Campbell discuss the aldermanic
ma ter IN that way. At that time Mcclure
hau told MIN that Durham, or his agents had
asked MIN to make an affidavit that he had
heard Campbell so state but that Mcclure
toId them that he could not do so because
~ was not So Campbell closes with de-
mai OF the affidavit of Charles II. Marsh &c
to an alleged remark that Durham oueht To
be sent to prison. "
Harrison Moves, for the defense also
con rlbuted batch of literature unon tbe
suoJSct 10 the extent of seventeen affidavits.
nearly all OF them testifying to the good
character of William E. Stewart who fpEroe
DIS the slgner of one of the previous afidavite
attorney Fred H. Ayers denies the stale
me- OF Charles F: Soldering, that the latter
the production of an affidavit to the effec+
that campbell had been heard to EXPRESS an
opinion upon the merits of the case. He ad-
mus that ne asked Soldering if he waa pre-
P pare TO make such an affidavit and Soldering
mad told him that he could not AFFORD 70 il Dc
SO; III view of the relationship between MIN
seit and Campbell. La.er Soderlinp nd
b lo e.I nm now much there was in it, and
torn lepiI tb twenty-five dollars for the at
IIorhey that draws up the affidavit Soder-
ing then asked if the attorney Womb NOT
iflue' ana 10 this Ayers made no renIv
do Later IN the presence of P NJ. Elliott So
nronf 5, ndu oHered to furnish him undoubted
PROOF that Juror Armatage was not a citizen
II ne paid go for the work and to tbis eta+a
iiiC rll!ott assents in a separate afidayit
n McGuire contributes the only othar
e. oatil Oh interest. He swears that Charles
y. Soderilng had told him that there wac s50
IN II for him to make an affidavit tn The er gov
lnat ne mad never heard Juror CamnheII AZ
PieSe any OPINION upon the matter at issue