The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-05-02

tugs and all boats Of the Great Lakes
that ston at Detroit. Mr.. Townsend
said the work was largely similar.
He told Judge Young he knew OF
The Courier News financial standing
only from heresay, from the other re-
porters. He said Mr.. Baker had told
him the paper wasn't paying and that
he had told this to Mr.. Guild on that
first visit.
Called After Midnight.
Judge Young brought out Mr.
Townsend's midnight trip to the resi-
dence Of Mr.. and Mrs. Ed. A. Anderson
to see Miss Jorgenson. the bool<keeper
He said Mr.. More had asked him to
see Miss Jorgenson, that he had been
trying to get in touch with her a
number Of times during the day but
had been unable to do so. During the
afternoon he had called the office
several times but said he was inform
ed Miss Jorgenson was out at~a law
yer's office. This led him to think, the
witness said, that she was at Watson
g. Young's, as he heard Pollock &
Pollock had no, access to Miss Jor-
genson.
Here the cross examination became
tense for several minutes. Judge
Young pinned the witness down to the
person who had told him Pollock &
Pollock had had no access to Miss
Jorgenson. Mr.. Townsend said he
thought it was the stenographer
though he didn't know who it was who
answered the phone.
Telegram From stedman.
Mr.. Townsend testified that Mr.
More had sent him a telegram from,
Mr. Stedman of Minneapolis. This
message was brought to him, he said
ny M. N. Hatcher. one Of the former
owners of the plant.
The Stedman telegram said in sub
stance, he said, that everything was
ready to purchase The Courier News
plant. provided Mr.. More kept $4,000
interest in the paper himself.
He said Mr.. More had asked him tt
go to Miss JoFgenson and tell her tc
tell the truth on the stand. He denied
that Mr.. More mentioned the 81, ,OO(
entry in this Connection, saying he hiEa.
self had never heard Of the $1,000
entry until he had heard the testi.
mony in court.
He said he finally got in touch with
Miss Jorgenson that night at mid.
night, that he mistook the number Of
Mr.. Anderson's residence and thought
it was on Thirteenth street north in.
stead Of south, so that he made 8
useless trip to the north side, which
delayed him in reaching Mr.. Ander-
sons residence until o'clock
Had she not been monopolized In
her time by the Guilds, said Mr.
Townsend, this midnight trip would
have been unnecessary. When he talk
ed to her over the phone he said he
asked her If he could speak to he1
alone either in the morning or that
night, and she had told him to come
then II he cared to. When he arrived
at the Anderson residence, he said, he
asked her if they were alone and il
anyone could hear them.
Mr.. Townsend then said he told
Miss Jorgenson If she told the truth
on the witness stand, she needn't be
afraid that she would lose her posi-
tion for Mr.. More would take care of
her. ..... II
He said he made an appointment to
meet her the following morning at the
N. p. depot but that she failed to ap-
pear, though he was there.
Related His Discharge.
Tuesday evening, Mr.. Townsend
said, on redirect examination, DIR,
Guild called him up shortly before his
usual time of reporting at the office
He said the plaintiff asked him to
come to the office very soon if he
could. ..-H "l
When he arrived, Mr. Townsend
said, DR.. Guild called him into his
private Office and asked him If he
had anything there he wanted, If so to
get his belongings together and 60
and that he didn't want him to come
back.
Dispute of Counsel.
Rather sensational moment occur
red this morning in the proceedings
Of the trial In which Judge Young and
Counsel Fowler were the central
figures. Tt rose over the plaintiffs
Interrogation of certain OF the de-
PENDANTS witnesses about mailing
list purporting to have been for Janu-
ary, 1913.
Counsel for the plaintiff had not
introduced the list as evidence, to
which the opposing counsel took seri-
GUS objection. The question rose as
to the legality Of the Identification of
this list without entering the same
as an exhibit. Judge Young showed
by statute where 1t rested with the
discretion of the court.
He stated he was unwilling to give
the opposition opportunity to peruse
the list until he knew himself whether
or not he wished to introduce 1t as
evidence. That In so doing he felt
would be giving the defense a chance
to frame UP satisfactory explanatio ion
OF this list.
Mr.. Fowler demanded at once to
know If counsel for the plaintiff was
personal In his inferences. Judge