The Minneapolis journal. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn.) 1888-1939, 1904-05-13
HILL WRITES
TO The JUDGE
Says the Latter Never Asked a
Campaign Contribution
f& from Him.
Collins Issues a Formal State
ment Disposing Of Dunn's
H. Recent Charges.

Ing statement covering the recent
attack upon him by r. c. Dunn, and
giving in detail the correspondence be-
tween himself and James j. Hill, pres
ident Of the Great Northern railway.
Mr.. Dunn's managers had copies of
the correspondence, and they had
limited that Judge Collins would never
make it public tho it is difficult to see
why. Mr.. Hills first letter was eva
sive, but the second one clears Judge
Collins entirely of the charges made,
and leaves Mr.. Dunn "up in the air."
Judge Collins statement is as fol-
lows:
Minnesota never before have been called
upon to publicly resent attack upon
my personal character. I cannot allow the
recent attack Of Mr.. Dunn to go unno-
ticed. He has right to his own Views
upon public questions. and he may choose
his political associates but he has no right
to defame others who differ with him and
his friends upon these questions. I judge
him from his own language and acts.
Dunn and the Merger. ......
In the Pioneer Press Of Jan. 8, 1902,
he is quoted as saying, concerning the
railroad merger. then the subject Of heated
discussion In this state: IT believe that
the fight against Mr. Hill is inspired by
rival railway companies and am heartily
out of sympathy with it because of this
belief" Mr.. Dunn has never announced
O. change Of mind upon this subject. In
fact, q short time since he caused this
interview to be republished, with a state
ment that he stood by 1t, and in his inter-
view with Mr.. Hill, published in the Dis
patch Of the 7th inst, the latter, speak
ing of the present campaign, assured Mr..
Dunn that he had his (Mr. Hills) best
wishes, and also that the figures to be OBJ
tanned at the office might help Bob"
Because many persons including myself,
have recognized and seen fit to refer to
this well-known relationship and intimacy
between these gentlemen-which intimacy
and exchange Of sympathy Mr.. Dunn now
publicly admits-he found provocation in
speech at Minneapolis on May 6 to
charge Calmly and deliberately" that in
1894, when a candidate for reelection to
the supreme bench I solicited and Sc
cured the support OF James j. Hill to the
extent Of a contribution Of from 100000
to $4,000 to my campaign fund. This was
q direct charge that I had solicited from
Mr.. Fill the large sum Of money mentioned
for my personal use. In q letter dated
May 7 I asked Mr.. Dunn if he had used
this language, but to this letter have re-
ceived no reply, and I note from state
ments In the public press that none will
be made. Knowing the utter falsity OF
this charge, and believing that Mr.. Hill
would refuse to father 1t, wrote to him.
o.. Questions Put to Hill.
First-Did you contribute any sum
whatsoever to my campaign fund when
was a candidate against the Hon. Johr
Willis. or have you ever contributed tt
that fund In any other campaign? II so
when, where, how much, and to whom was
the money paid?
Second-Did I ever solicit or receive
from you, or from anyone connected will
you in business or otherwise, any money
whatsoever for campaign purposes? I
so, when, where, how much, and to whom
was the money paid? Omitting the ad
dress, Mr.. HilPs reply was as follows:
Dear Sir: Your letter of even date was dull,
received. AS same is rather ambiguous, woult
like to hear from you further as to how ia
you wish me to 60 Into details in connection
with the matter referred to therein. Yours ver
truly, Jas. j. Hill.
did not regard my letter as ambigu
GUS, but, waving the point, immediatel.
replied as follows:
Hon. James J. HILL City-Dear Sir: Referrin
TO the letters which have recently passed betwee
u.s. let me say that Mr.. Dunn explicitly charge
in his speech, If correctly reported, that sole
ited and received from you between $50, 900 an
10000 in the campaign Of 1894. But one cor
struction be placed on this language an
but meaning can be attributed to it. which
that at the time mentioned I solicited froI
you and that you furnished to me for my ow
private and individual use In that campaign tn
large sum OF money mentioned. It thi
construction and meaning had In mind, whe
writing my former letter, and I therefore as
you, first, did ! solicit from you any contribr
lions of money in the campaign Of 1894, or an
other campaign? If So when, where and no,
much?
Second-Did you contribute to me personally
for my personal use any money in 1894, at an
other time for campaign purposes? If So wheI
where, how much and to whom was the none
paid2 These questions pointed and diret
words can make them, and I respectfully 81
hcit an early reply. Respectfully yours,
Il. W. Collins.