Bismarck weekly tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1884-1943, 1899-03-10

North Dakota, and to which is attached
the sworn affidavit of M. r. Farrell as
clerk of the district court and James A
Weed, a person claiming to have a full
knowledge of the facts in which the wit.
ness says in substance that all of the
naturalization papers recorded on pages
"a to "a inclusive in Logan county were
issued by the court on a verbal order
from you directing him to do so, court
not being in session at the time and
that during the month of December, he
forwarded to you by your direction, the
naturalization record and in January re.
ceived it back with your name signed to
the records showing that the naturaliza-
tions had been granted in open court.
The committee has also taken the sworn
testimony of one George HI. Purchase
which to the extent of his statements at
least confirm the truthfulness of the
newspaper reports of which you have
complained. Mr.. Purchase t~estifies
among other things that he was the in
dividual who gave to the newspapers
the statements published in the clip
pings you have furnished the commit
tee. In addition Mr.. Purchase stated in
substance that one Ed. Rose, your off
cial stenographer had attempted to bride
him into making an affidavit, connecting
Governor Fancher with the publications
but that he could not truthfully make
any such statement. That Ros%efurnished
him free transportation from his (Pur-
chase's) fathers house to jamestown
and return and produced before the
committee an order purporting to be in
Roses handwriting, for the furnishing to
him of a rig. The committee has also
taken the testimony of one Peter Pear
son who testities to the truthfulness of
those parts of the printed interviews of
the printed slips furnished the commit
tee so far as they relate to the matter
on the board of commissioners.
No witnesses have been examined 9TH
er than as above indicated and the COM
mittee has determined to ask you either
to appear in person or by representative
and let the committee know what you
desire done in this matter and what if
any testimony you have to offer in con-
tradiction of the truthfulness of the
newspaper articles you have complained
of.
1t seems to the committee that you
should in person and by such witnesses
as you may see lit to produce make
affidavit and such testimony as you de-
sire showing that the matters of which
you have been charged are false.
We have been willing to have called
before the committee any of the news
paper men you may suggest and will be
glad to do SO now or in fact adopt what
ever course we car consistently with our
duties in the premises"
In answer to this, the committee re-
ceived from Judge Glaspell, by his at
torney John Knauff, a letter asking for
a copy of all testimony introduced, an
opportunity to c~ross-eXamine witnesses,
to produce such rebuttal testimony as
might be desired and the privilege of ap-
pearing by attorney before tho commit
tee for any and eli purposes. In answer
to this, the chairman of the committee
replied that Judge Glaspell had already
been informed of all matters considered
by the committee, that he had repeated
ly been offered an opportunity to appear
before the committee to present such
evidence as he desired, and that unless
this was done at once. the report Of the
committee would be filed. This was fol
lowed by the arrival of several witnesses
from jamestown, among them Attorney
Murphy, Stcnographcr Rose, who tcsti-
fled, in addition to Glaspell's attorney,
Knauf, and States Senator Fuller.
WHAT PURCHASE SAYS.
The first testimony taken before the
committee was that of George H. Pur.
chase, on February II. Purchase testi-
fled that he was an attorney-at-law at
jamestown from 1889 to 1891. That he
and Glaspell had been interested in a
suit against the Northern Pacific fol
damages or behalf of William Everitt
That a verdict had been rendered fol
$1,000 in favor of tho plaintiff and that
$1,000 was collected in the Judgment Of
which half was retained as attorney fee
half to go to Glaspell and half to him
self. That Glaspell had collected the
judgment and retained the entire attor
ney fee.
That he instituted a suit against Glas
pell and served the summons on Nov. %
for his share of the fee, as Glaspell hae
refused to pay him what he claimed wa.
due. That the summons was served a
10 o'clock in the forenoon and at
o'clock in the afternoon he was arrested
on q bench warrant on q charge of main
tanning a common nuisance in 1891,
case which he had reason to believe hat
been dropped from statements of TIL
former judge and states attorney. Tha
he presented a bond which he could no
get the clerk of court to approve, al
though it was a good and sufficient bond
and that he was kept in Jail 81 days, fin
ally tried and acquitted. That he SO
cured a second bond and the deput,
clerk Of the court showed his fist in thl
face of Ole of the bondsmen and mad
him take his name off. That he coul,
not apply to the Judge for approval o
the bond after the deputy clerk of tn
court refused to do SO because the judg
took the train out of town and went Il
New Rockford for a week to hold court
That an attorney at jamestown ofere,
to get him released for 500 if he woult
not appear OF the first day of the Janu
airy term Of court and that he stated
that he would not agree, as that would
interfere with his civil suit against Glas
, pell. That after he was tried and abou
two weeks before the time of the inves
tigatlon, he was told that Ed Rose, elias
pells stenographer wanted to see him
That he went to see Rose, who told hin
i he wa afraid he would lose his job j
! Glaspell was turned out of Office ant