OCR Interpretation


Chicago daily tribune. [volume] (Chicago, Ill.) 1872-1963, February 02, 1879, Image 1

Image and text provided by Library of Congress, Washington, DC

Persistent link: https://chroniclingamerica.loc.gov/lccn/sn84031492/1879-02-02/ed-1/seq-1/

What is OCR?


Thumbnail for

VOLUME XXXIX.
UNGER'S
LAUNDRY
Continues to EOtIGH DRY
FAIILY WASHINGS
At the rate of 15* eta. per piece In bundles of 100
pieces. Bundles of from 50 to 75 pieces. 2c per piece
Bugles fromrsto ipo pieces, si.so for the bundle.
BO FAMILY BUN DLE rough dried for less than sl.
Housekeepers will relieve themselves of the drudg
ery of wash-day by sendlne their bundles to us to be
Rough Dried.
Collection and delivery free. Orders can be sent by
post.
Offices —No. 40 N. Clark; No. 126 Dearborn—st.;
No. 60S Wabash-av.; and
No. 901 Cottage Grove av.
STATIO.\CB\, Etc*
CULVEB.PAGE. HOYBE & GO.
118 & 120 Monroe-si,
Wholesale and Retail Heal
ers In all hinds of Station
ery, tetter Presses «fc Stands,
Ramping Bonis and Brush
es, Copying Boohs of all
sizes, Od Board and Blot
ting Paper. Office and Mouse
Dusters of Ostrich or Tur
key. Feathers, Wool, & Jute.
CELVEPi, PAGE, BOYJiE & CO.
PUA'OS,
DOHI
STEM AY
PIANOS.
f e have In stock and can offer at a very great bar
gain a superb 7-oc:ave Upright, nearly new. and In
every respect as good as new. and will be warranted as
Mich.
LYON & HEALY,
FINANCIAL,
T. 6. KNAPP.
Member of the Stock Exchanpe.
<Sc PEABODY,
Bankers and Brokers, 2S Kcw-st., New York. We
buy and sell Stocks, Bonds, and Securities of all kinds
at the New York stock Exchange on commission.
Orders solicited. Defer by permission to Francis B.
Peabody, of Chicago; Augustus S. Peabody, of N. Y.
FIBSEMTY,
STATE,
GEKJLAV SATUTGS
Bank Books bonpbt for CASH. GERHARD FORE
MAN. UC Washln"ton-st,
SAFE MONEY!
•BybuyiDjj City Scrip and County Orders to pay roar
, personal and real esuac taxes.
IRA HOLMES, General Broker,
• 83 Wasbicgion-ct.
SIL’VIBIE?,
ißotJßblandSoldat a discount byH. .7. CHRISTOPH
.Ranker, ir.7 Kamlolph-st., dealer In Foreign Excbance
and U. s. Bonos.
TO XjOJLUST,
Money oi 7 per cent on city property by
GALLUP & CAMERON. IIP Dcarbom-st.
COAL.
J. L HATHAWAY,
38 Martet-st., cor. Eandolph.
1 ISorth Market-st.
267 Arclier-av.
COAL,
Delivered promptly in all parts of
the city, and in cars on day of re
ceipt of order.
Orders by mail and AM. DIS
TRICT and BELL TELEPHONES
•will receive prompt attention.
CLOX HIIiVG.
TEN YEARS’
Experience manufacturing Clothing, during which
time we have made and sold at retail more garments
than any other Ann ever has In this city, enables us to
offer the greatest Inducements to buyers. We keep in
stock garments of every size, from the boy of 2 years
♦ to those which fit racu who must stoop to go through a
6*6 door. Short men, don’t buy coats with the waist
below your hips, and pants which come up to your arm
pits, we" can fit you perfectly. Fat men, we can fit
you, too. Our coats and overcoats run to &0 inches
breast measure. We want every >erson In Chicago
who thinks he cannot be fitted without paying mer
chant tailor’s prices to call at once at our Great Steam
Power Clothing Manufactory, 416. 4IS. 420, 422, and
424 Milwaakcc-av,
cXjEnucßisrT sc sayer.
60 TO JOHN JONES,
119 Dearborn-st., and Ret your Clothes Thoroughly
Cleaned and Neatly Repaired.
BUSINESS CARDS
FAKIWAT MOSES
B«* opened a Tnrklah Bazaar at l«9 7-Vaba*h-av.. one
block south of Field, Lvitcr &■ Co., with a large variety
of Turkish, Persian, Daghestan Hugs and Carpets; also
Ancient and Modern Embroideries and Turkish Fancy
woods, all of the finest descriptions and designs. Call
and examine the stock.
GEO. C. BATES,
_ LEADYILLE, COL.
-gbcclal attention to Mining Litigation.
otrriciA.ts.
. AUKa&SE, OPTICIAN- Tribune Boildfnff.
JJM Spectacles suited to all sights on scientific prla-
PP I * B - Opera and Field Glasses. Telescopes, Micro
•goes. Barometer*. Ac.
TO RE>T.
. TO KENT,
In The Tribune Building, two very
desirable offices on the second
floor, and one on the third floor.
Apply to
m c. bow,
Room 8 Tribune Building.
EOS KENT.
”» n«rt»ni -st-. vault, water, ana all
Sr.I?S? n 9 ,lS * ln( Julre at JOHN JONES’ Cleaning and
jsgpalrtpg i»oom«. basement-
'OOTHPICKS.
fFAAfflffl : HAVING BOCGHT AT^MAND
■ i ihh h zoToi™**' siLB a laiigb
iWiVJkir oodeil Tooth Picks
■ IIIJ 1 1/ Cl will sell them at 8c per box, or
r'Bfl Bi % SB. m per hundred boxes, at
I 11/fijO. JE. J.WSHMAIHS’S
•THE Fair, cor. State and Adams.
®jje ' palfo ttffifc
Baj bought a car-load, and asks you to notice these
prices:
Good Toilet Soap (small cake) . ic
Good Toilet Soap (larger cake) 2c
Old English Mottled Castile Soap 2c
Fine Honey-Glycerine and Brown Windsor Soap.... 4c
Genuine Turkish Bath Soap sc
Larce 15-cent Cakes Honey and Glycerine Soap fie
**Mammoth ** 2n-ccnt Cakes of Fine Soaps 9c
Honey or Glycerine Bouquet Soaps nc
These Soaps are as fine os cau he made. Every Cake
warranted.
DO YOU NEED APOCZETBOOK:
A Leather Pocketbook for.
Better ones for.
20-cent i’oeketbooku for
40-cent Pocketbooka for
75-cent Pockeibooks for
SI.OO Pockeibooks for
$2.00 Pocketbooka for
Are Tour "Eds Out at the ringers?
SEA opens to-morrow morning 25 dozen of 2-button
SI.OO quality of Beal French Kid Gloves (In everv shade
and color) at 4sc per pair. For any of those Gloves that
break or tear a new pair will be freely given, as every
pair la fully warranted. J
25-cent quality Kid Gloves for.
Great Bargains in Housekeeping Goods
ALRKADr ADVERTISED WE KOW OFFER
3-quart milk pans Go Soup ladles no
3-quart milk pans. 7c|mluclub knives flc
6-quartmilk pan 5....... 9c t Tca canisters gc
2-quart coffee p0t5...... I2c, Coffee canisters sc
Kerosene oil cam 14c 25-cent tack hammers Oc
Large dippers 9c,6a-ceni hatchets 19c
i lot cups. 3c Flour sieve and scoop
Covered tin palls... 9c, combined 24c
P> ns 12c Large dinner bells....asc
Collandcra 14c, Veneered slop pa 115.... 54c
Tubed caked pans., 9c;Potato mashers 6c
Pie plates 4c ttoUioff plus 4o
Washbasins 9C Best brooms 9c
Covered steamers 18c Large clothes racks.. .47c
Bust pans Dc Best palls, 9c
Match safes 4c’Wash tubs 24c
Fire shovels 4c.Wash boards isc
Coffeepot stands 4c Market baskets 4c
Basting spoons 9c Boot blacking
Family scales l4ci.Matches :*^c
Coffee flasks. dc'BJacklog brushes 9c*
Pepper boxes 4ci Whisk onioiAs 9c
Salt boxes 4CiClotbes plus, per dozen 2c
Nutmeg craters scTS-ccnt lanterns 39c
24 sheets paper for 4c
24 envelopes (all colors) 4c
Blank books for, 3c
643 boxes of our 7sic paper ana envelopes sold last week.
that S£l Sells the Purest, Cheapest, and Best
76 STATE STREET.
State and Moaroe-sti.
AUCTION!!
STEPHEN PEABODY.
1. H. MILLER, Jeweler,
Cor, State, and Monroe-sts,,
Is now being closed out in lots to
suit purchasers, as Mr. Miller is de
termined to close up and go out of
Jewelry business. By attending
great .bargains can be obtained in
WATCHES, DIAMONDS, JEWED
SY, SILVERWARE, CLOCKS,
BRONZES, and PANCUT ARTI
CLES. This sale is an absolute
closing out one. and the goods and
fixtures will be sold at any price
purchasers will give for them. . At
tend and examine lor yourself. La
dies are invited.
PRIVATE BIDS SOLICITED for
THE FIXTURES IN PART OR
WHOLE.
BLACK HILLS
AHD
LEADYILLE
Are attracting serious atten
tion from men of practical abil
ity, and fortunes are to be made
the coming season. The imme
diate attention of investors is
respectfully called to the offer
of the undersigned in our “ ads ”
under the head of “ Country
Beal Estate.” Address
J. E. BT7BTON,
Geneva Lake, Wis.
CABINET PORTRAITS in any
desired style, Elegant, and Superior
to any produced elsewhere in the
city, at the uniform price of $6
PER DOZEN.
CHILDREN Photograplied
instantaneously.
Brmdk Studies
Mete. Provision Dealers,
. ana Grocers
Win do well to call at the Wholesale Mar
ket in our Slaughtering and Packing
House, corner Halsted and Xiumber-sta.
(south of Twentv-aeoond-st-i to bur
DKBbSED HOGS, FKBSH MEATS, Lord,
Pork, Choice Sugar-Cured Hama, Dried
Seef, Breakfast Bacon, Sausage, Soused
Pig’s Feet, Fresh and Corned Beef, etc., etc.
niJDBBWOOD & CO.
NOTICE.
Inflian anfl Aneient GniiesilißS.
I will bay for cash Indian and ancient curiosities,
such as Tomahawks, Leather Garments, articles of
var. or Paintings, and old Silver and China Ornaments.
C. D. MBTZLER, 123 Franklin**.
NOTIONS.
MM EVER
USE ANY SOAP?
SEA
1,000 of these Boohs ax Half Value.
IN ADDITION TO THE
DON’T FOKGET
Candy in Chicago, at
WATCHES, JUVJBLRV, Etc.
THE STOCK AND FIXTURES
REAL ESTATE.
PHOTOGRAPH V.
MEATS.
W.WTED,
JUDGE BLODGETT.
The Hibbard Charge Still
Under Consider
ation.
Testimony of Some More
of the Grand
Judge Bangs on the Stand—
His Conversations with
Judge Blodgett.
.6c and 7c
How He Was Induced to Suppress
the Indictments Against
the Eegister.
Proctor Knott Holds Him
Tight to the Rack on
Material Points.
What Has Become of the Short-
Hand Notes of the Grand
Jury Proceedings ?
Lively Cross-Questioning by Some of
the Members of the Com
mittee.
Judge Drummond Relates His In l
terview with Judge Blod
gett,
His Opinion as to the Propriety of the
Hibbard Indictment.
REGULATING ATTENDANCE.
The Blodgett iuvestigation was resumed yes
terday morning, about three-fourths of an hour
after the time to which an adjournment was
taken Friday afternoon. It is beginning to be
very evident that 9:30 is rather too early a
moraine hour for all the parties, fop up to date
only one session has none off promptly at that
time. Yesterday morning it was the Blodgett
party who were late, the investigators and the
memorialists bavins: the start of them some*
thins: like half an hour. When the gentlemen
did come together, a brief consultation was held
around the Committee’s table, the subject of
the conference being the question os to what
should be done to prevent a repetition of the
crowding and jamming: which took place Friday.
The upshot of it all was that the ticket scheme
of admissions was adopted for the remainder of
•the investigation. As it was of coarse im
practicable to get out tickets yesterday morn
ing:, the new rule will not go into force until
Monday morning. The crowding of the day De
fore bad the effect, also, of suggesting to the
Committee the' propriety of stationing' some
'one at the entrance to the room whose duty
consisted in warding off the commoners from
the privileged class and sending the former to
the rear of the room and the latter to the front.
This additional precautionary scheme worked
with considerable success, and, although the
crowd was very fair for the opening hour, it was
possible to conduct the investigation, and par
ticularly to report it, with some degree of com
fort and satisfaction. As the hours passed the
crowd grew in size, but the prohibitory arrange
ments to prevent jamming were effective in
keeping it within subjection and proper bounds,
and no one whose attendance was a matter of
business or duty had the slightest cause for
complaint that his comfort'was not sought to
be provided for.
Among the morning arrivals was Judge Bangs,
muliied as to his throat in a huge scarf. Having
divested himself of bis superfluous clothing, be
caught up a morning paper and Oceanic appar
ently very much interested in reading what the
Grand Jurors, ami particularly Dr. Hamlinc,
had to say about him on the stand Friday.
A. li. HOSE.
The first witness called to the stand was Mr.
A. L. Bose, an accountant, who testified that at
the request of the Committee of the Bar Asso
ciation he made an examination of the hooks of
Mr. Hibbard, Register in Bankruptcy, to ascer
tain the amount of fees and emoluments earned
or received by him for the years ending June 30,
1875, 1876, and 1877, in such cases oniv as had
been referred to him during those years.
Mr. Trumbull—l do not tee the legality of
this. The jury did not pass upon it.
The Chairman—We would like.to know the
facts in regard to that matter. We wish to know
precisely how the fact was, and whether it was
called to the attention of the Grand Jury, what
ever the fact was.
The witness stated that he had with him a
copy of the report which he made to the Com
mittee, which he had verified and found correct.
For the year ending June 30,1875, Mr. Hibbard
reported receipts for cases brought before him
daring that year, $9,687.87; number of cases,
160; the deposit fees amounted to $8,033.09, and
Mr. Hibbard reported denosit fees to the amount
of $0,132.89 for that year. Witness found the
number of cases that were actually referred to
Mr. Hibbard during that year by reference to
his docket. In ascertaining the amount of fees
received or earned iu these cases, witness took
the deposits in each ease made with the Register
by the Clerk of the District Court, when the
case was commenced and referred to him. For
the year ending June 30,1876, he found 273 eases
referred to Mr. Hibbard, and from the lee-book
he ascertained that the denoslts amounted to
811,291.10; Mr. Hibbard reported $9,687.87, a
discrepancy of $4,006.53, his receipts being un
derstated to that extent. This statement did
not include any fees earned or received by
Mr. Hibbard in any eases that had been referred
to him previous to that year. For the year end
ing June 30,1877, there were 254 cases, aggre
gating in receipts $13,485.05; Mr. Hibbard re
ported $9,225.50, a discrepancy of $4,619.55.
This amount of receipts included nothing for
fees or emoluments earned or received in cases
commenced previous to that year. Witness was
subptenaed and testified before the United
States Grand Jury in October last, and gave
substantially the same testimony as he now
gave to this Committee.
The Chairman—Was the District-Attorney
present when you testified before the Grand
Jutyi
Mr. Rose—Yes, sir; Judge Bangs was present.
The witness further said that the items that
be obtained from Mr. Hibbard’s fee-books, iu
which be ascertained the amount of fees earned
or received in these three years respectively, in
cluded no fees charged or received by Mr.
Hibbard for the proof of creditors' claims,
from the fact that Mr. Hibbard kept no
record of such fees. Witness Uid not take such
fees into consideration because he could not
ascertain them. He asked -Mr. Hibbard for in
formation on the subject of such fees, stating
that be would like to get the amount of fees for
proofs of claims, and Mr. Hibbard promised to
make out a list; but witness never could get it,
because Mr. Hibbard said be bad not bad time
to do it. Witness obtained some information
on the subject, however, from the Assignees’
accounts in some. special cases; but none of
them entered into his computation, .nor did he
include anything for examination of debtors or
-other parties, nor anything nut what appeared
on the Register’s fee-book. There was nothing
on the fee-book lor the taking of testimony.
The computation included nothing for fees
SUNDAY. FEBRUARY 2. 1879—SIXTEEN PAGES
Jurors.
Blodgett said that Hibbard could not be held
resnousiblc for such reports, because he (Judge
Blodgett) had construed the law in a wav that
was in accordance with those returns. When
witness asked Judge Blodgett to excuse him,
something was said in reference to this indict
ment. Judge Blodgett remarked that Hibbard
could not be held responsible for those reports;
that Hibbard had consulted with him
at the time the law was framed,
or when he was obliged to make
his report after the law went into operation,
and that he (Blodgett) had given him an opin
ion as to the construction of it. Judge Blodgett
also stated, witness thought thatßaugs said, he
had consulted with Judge Drummond, and, as
he remembered, Judge Dyer, as to their con
struction of the law, and that both of those
Judges had agreed with him. Witness did not
remember that Judge Blodgett said he had con
sulted with Judge Drummond as to this particu
lar case of Hibbard’s, but he remembered Judge
Blodgett’s saying that Judge Drummond had
called his (Blodgett’s) attention to the pub
licity with which the Grand Jury had
allowed tbeir proceedings to go forth.
Witness explained that the newspaper
reports were not invariably to be relied unon,
and referred to the fact that Judge Blodgett
bad found some fault with the jury for taking
up time, reminding him that he must see that
be (the witness) was as aoxious as anvbody
could be to be relieved from duty. He thought
Judge Blodgett stated at that time that he had
no doubt of the honesty and desire of the jury
to do everything in accordance with what was
right.
In reply to questions from Col. Cooper, wit
ness stated that judge Blodgett, on the occasion
'of this interview in chambers between himself
and the witness, volunteered a good deal of ex
planation, and referred to the tact that the con
struction of the law was somewhat different
with regard to a Register than with regard to a
United States Marshal, and that, inconsequence,
the law could be differently construed.
“ Did he. ask you whether the Grand Jury
bad found that Hibbard bad returned all bis
fees, earned or received during the year coverea
by his report in those eases only commenced
daring thatyear, or referred to him during that
year! ”
“ I don’t think he asked me that,”
“ Did he ask you wherein you found Hibbard
had understated his fees (”
earned or received for examinations in bank
ruptcy, nor for proof of claims by creditors.
In cross-examination by Mr. Campbell, wit
ness said be made ao examination to show how
much of the deposit of SSO in each case had
been actually earned during the year. He did
not know bow much of the aggregate of SB,OOO
which had been deposited with Mr. Hibbard
bad been earned by him as fees, and bow much
remained in his hands as a trust fund. He mere
ly ascertained the amount of the total deposit
made at the commencement of the proceedings
or subsequently, when the original deposit had
been exhausted and further funds provided.
There were some cases where the original de
posit bad not been exhausted. The same wns
true of the years 1876 and 1b77. Witness did
not state this* to the Grand Jury; no such ques
tion had been asked him. Where any oi the
original deposit had been refunded, witness did
not include in his feport the amount refunded.
He examined to see whether anv of the origi
nal deposit had been subsequently refunded,;
and where he found that this was so he struck
off the amount refunded from his calculation of
receipts. His statement of the deposits was
the total amount, less all sums refunded, as
noted in the fee book, not necessarily during the
year, but at times thereafter. He did not know
whether the amount of §6,432.89 reported for
the year 1875 was » correct statement ot the
fees received and' actually earned without re
gard to what the deposit had been; nor did he
know this fact with regard to the amounts re
ported for the years 1870 and 1877. He was not
prepared to state that the amount reported as
fees received and earned during those years was
incorrect, #
On redirect examination by Mr. Knickerbock
er, witness read from the pamphlet report of the
Bar Association Committee the form of Mr.
Hibbard’s report fo file Attorney-General for
1875, which was more detailed than that made
by witness, the voluntary and involun
tary cases being separately classified. He
gave Mr. Hibbard credit in all cases
where fees were ; returned by him for the
amounts so returned; he did not recollect of
more than one or two cases in the whole three
years in which any fees had been returned.
There was no mention made on the fee-book of
any deposits for years previous to 1875 being re
turned. There was no fee-bill from Mr. Hib
bard on file in tbe Clerk’s office, and, on asking
, Mr. Hibbard about it, Mr. Hibbard said that, as
his office was on the same lluor with tbe Clerk’s
office, he had not been in the habit of making
out a fee-bill and ifiling it in the office, as his
• books were operf to inspection at any.time by
the parties concerned. In proportion to the
number ot cases witness examined, the propor
tion in which Mr. Hibbard had charged and re
ceived more than [the SSO deposited in the first
instance was quitof large.
On the reerossj bv Mr. Campbell witness
stated that there were quite a number of cases—
perhaps forty—in "each year when the Register
earned more than the SSO original deposit within
Hie fiscal year. His attention had not been
called to that. ■ s
“ How can you state what the facts are in that
regard!” i
“From general recollection.”
‘•How far dowu'did you examine the acconnt
to see whether ithe deposit had been ex
hausted?”
“I was unable io follow the account on the
fee-book from the fact that there were no dates
on the fee-book, except the date at the head
when tire original deposit was made. . There
was nothing on. the fee-book by which I
could determine ■ when the fees were
earned. ’ There were one or two
cases where the original deposit of SSO was not
exhausted. I did not follow them down to sec
if it bad been exhausted subsequently."
In reply to Xlr. Lapnain, witness said, in the
year ending June 30,1875, Mr. Hibbard reported
100 cases, the same number he found. He
could not tell what the Register’s receipts
were, owing to the fact that no record was kept
ofsomcofthe receipts, but ascertained as far
as he could from the books what they were.
His estimate was confined entirely to the SSO
deposits.
To Col. Ccooer he said there were deposits
added to deposits.
E. G. KEITH.
Mr. E. G. Keith, of Keith Bros. & Co., a
member of the Jate Grand Jury, was the next
witness. He was examined by Co). Cooper, and
testlfied that itwas slated in the Grand-Jury
room by some member that there was dancer of
the jury being discharged before they reached
the Custom-House cases, the result of which
information was that they postponed the Hib
bard investigation until the Custom-House
cases bad been disposed of. One of the jurors
also reported that the Judge had matte some
statements about delays on the part of the jury,
which seemed to indicate that he had been mis
informed on the subject, and the result was the
appointment of the Committee of three, of
which witness was a member. The Committee
called on the Judge, who wanted to know
why they asked Judge Trumbull to come
before them. "Witness thought the Judge’s
manner was a tfc little ou the scoldimr
order.” The Committee told him thevsupposed
Judge Trumbull haa some knowledge of these
bankruptcy matters, and the Judge said that if
the jury wanted law they could come to him.
The Committee then told him that they hadn’t
asked for law. Judge Bangs having conducted
the examination. The Judge also referred to
Uic publication of the daily proceedings in the
newspapers, and, as witness remembered, said
that they might about as well hold their sessions
ont on the prairie. [Laughter.] The fact was,
that the newspapers published a good deal more
thau they knew, and rather more than actually
happened. [Laughter.]
Col. Cooper asked if Judge Blodgett, at this
interview, mentioned Mr. Ayer’s uameor Judge
Lawrence’s name.
The reply was that he did not. Judge
Trumbull was the only one complained of.
Witness told the Judee'that he was as anxious
to tret through and adjourn as a business-man
could be. Ho had never had any special ac
quaintance with Judge Blodgett, but he had
always respected him. About 5:30 o’clock, the
afternoon of the day when the jury was dis
charged, be went iu to see Judtre Blodgett for
the purpose of being excused from further serv
ice. The request was granted. He had never
seen him since that evening.
On the cross-examination, witness stated, in
reply to Mr, Campbell, that be remembered the
occasion when Judge Bangs came into the jury
room aud stated that the indictments were
not ready, and that, as to the perjury indict
ment, he would like to have the jurv go and
see Judge Blodgett and get his opinion as to
the propriety of finding this indictment. At
the same time. Judge Bangs said he considered
ft his duty to withhold it, having had a con
versation with Judge Blodgett, in which Judge
“No, sir. I think he seemed to understand
the case without regard to It.—that he seemed
to know all about it. In my conversation with
him, I think he referred to the fact that Bradley
had testified to some facts in the case.”
Mr. Campbell— u Hid vou stale, to Judge
Blodgett, when you went down-stairs, anything
in regard to the excitement which occurred in
the jury-room when Bangs said he would take
the responsibility of opposing that indictment! ”
“ I might have stated to him that there was
some feeling on the subject.”
“Didn’t you make such a statement, and
didn’t.that lead to the conversation?”
“ I don’t recollect.”
. To Mr, Lapham witness said that some of the
jurors said they didn’t care about taking
Blodgett’s opinion, Bangs having stated all that
they could get, even if they went before the
Judge.
COI,. XC7UNLET.
Col, Turnley, another of the grand jurors,
was sworn. He was present when the “perjury
or false return” indictment was found against
Hibbard. It was not returned to court because
of a question as to the propriety of it. After it,
with others, had been nut into the hands of the
District Attorney, the jury learned from him
that he didn’t approve of the propriety of that
count, and he sustained his position oy stating
that he had had. a conversation with Judge
Blodgett, and witness thought Mr. Bangs -vir
tually said he about concurred witu the District
Judge that that count should not be returned,
because Hibbard’s return, reputed to be false,
was made in accordance with his (Blodgett’s) in
terpretation of the law. This statement was made
within one or two days of the adjournment, and it
was the first time, witness thought, the jury
learned that there was objection to that second
count. No evidence was taken on the davof
adjournment. Judge Bangs said be had con
cluded to withhold the indictment after a con
versation with Judge Blodgett. The jury were
a little surprised to hear this at that time—at so
late an hour. Witness thought Judge Bangs
was requested to retire, and that the jury dis
cussed the matter. The talk was as to 'what
was best to be done. Judge Bangs returned,
and said if the jury desired any information
they could get it from Judge Blodgett. There
was talk of the jury preparing an indictment.
Witness said he would write one, but didn't .
recollect that be commenced it- There was a I
feeling of disappointment among the jury, they 1
considering themselves not properly treated, (
having been kept until a late hour without this .
knowledge. Witness tried to get exactly what
Judge Bangs said,—wrote it down, and fixed it
prettv well in his mind. He said that Hibbard
believed he had made his returns in accordance
with Judge Blodgett’s interpretation of the law,
not according to Judge Blodgett’s direction.
Judge Drummond’s name was mentioned, and
the impression witness got was that Judge
Drummond, by some means, at some time, at
some place, concurred in Blodgett’s opinion.
Bangs might have said bebelieved JudgeDrum
mona concurred; it was not categorical.
There was uo eross-examidatiou.
MARK BANGS.
District-Attorney Bangs was the next witness,
and, in reply to Col. Cooper, testified as follows:
He had been District Attorney about three
years. He formerly lived in Lacdn, Marshall
County. He at times presented cases to the
Grand Jury,—to the last one nearly all.
“Did you know, prior to the assembling
of that Grand Jury, that grave charges
affecting the integrity of H, N. Hibbard,
Register in Bankruptcy, and also J. A, Crain,
another Register, were in circulation in this
Judicial District?”
“I had seen a report, I think, of a committee,
and heard something as to Hibbard, but I don’t
think I knew anything about Crain.”
“Did you bring either of these matters be
fore the Grand Jury yourself ? ”
“ Both of them. They were presented to the
Grand Jury by me.”
“Bv culling witnesses?”
“Tis.” '
“Did yon direct their attention to them?”.
“I don’t know that I did.”
“ State tile fact. Did yon or not?”
“My recollection now is that the Grand Jury
drew up a paper including those cases, and some
bank cases, early in the session, and presented
it to me,” '
“Do you remember how this investigation
into the bankruptcy matter came about?”
,“ In what respect?”
“ As to the first step that was taken by the
Grand Jury,—the first step toward investiga
tion?”
“ I think it was to call witnesses."
“In what way? Who called for them?”
“ There was a suggestion that they desired
certain witnesses, and I had them summoned.”
Witness said that Col. Cooper was. perhaps,
sent tor at the instance of the jury. Hu did not
suggest his name, or remember the kind of a
subpoena under which he came. He remem
bered meeting Col. Cooper at the door of the
room, and telling him he was called with refer
ence to the bankruptcy matter. Witness re
quested him to bring the’ report of the Bar Com
mittee, and the jury requested a copy apiece, ■
and were supplied. Among the witnesses sum
moned were Norton, Bradley, Ayer, Judge
Lawrence, Judge Trumbull, and Rose.
“What matters with reference to Hibbard
were investigated ?”
“ His alleged criminal acts in taking unlawful
feus was one, and makiug false reports at the
eud of the rear was another.”
“Do vou'remember about Judge Trumbull
being asked by you with reference to the mak
ing of false returns of fees?”
“I remember that Judge Trumbull was there
as a witness to the question of the construction
of the nineteenth section of the amendment to
the Bankrupt law of 1874. I think that was un
der consideration.”
“ Who presented that?”
“ 1 did mvself.”
Mr. Knott—You asked Judge Trumbull to
give a legal opinion as to that?”
“The question had been considerably ” —-
“ Answer the question I just asked you,—if
you asked Judge Trumbull to give a legal
opinion?”
“X think the question was this: Whether ft
was susceptible of two constructions?”
“ Did you use about this language? [Reading
from manuscript] ‘Now, as we have the dis-,
tingiiishcd statesman and jurist before us, V
would like to ask him whether there could he a
construction of the law such as Air. Hibbard
makes and still be an honest man.’ ”
“ X don’t remember the question that I did
ask him, sir, but X am satisfied that law was
presented.”
“Didn’t yon ask him that question, and didn’t
he refuse to answer?”
“ 1 don’tthinkldid,—not the question in that
fiIISDC
“Did Judge Trumbull say substantially [Mr.
Knott read again from manuscript], ‘Judge,!
don’t think that is a proper question?’ ”
“ I think as to one of the questions I asked
him, he. perhaps, hesitated, and, possibly, de
clined entirely to answer.”
“What question was that?”
“It was a question in reference to Hibbard
acting under a construction of the statute, I
think. X don’t remember the form.”
“ Substantially the form X have given?”
“ Possibly it might be, substantially. I thiak
it was running in that direction.”
“He (Trumbull) considered that not a fair
question, and so replied?”
“ X think he declined to answer,or hesitated.”
“ And vou reneated and pressed it upon him ?’’
“I don’t remember now whether I did or
not. ”
“ Do vou remember his making such a reply
as tills [reading]: ‘lf you want me to answer,
1 must say I think not. I don’t think a Gov
ernment officer has the right to construe the
law in his favor for his own benefit. Tnat is
the trouble with the country now’? ”
“He made some reply of that general tenor.
X don’t remember the language. I think he
said, possibly, there was some trouble
with the country,—that officers were in
clined to put their own construction
on the" law, or something like that. I
want to state right here that X didn’t call any;of
these attorneys myself, but was requested to do
it by the Grand Jury.”
Mr. Lapham—Had legal opinions been re
quested from other witnesses prior to Judge
Trumbull on that questio'n of construction!
“ I don’t remember.”
Mr. Cooper—Had the clause in question, under
which Mr. Hibbard had returned bis fees—See.
19 of the act amendatory of the Bankrupt law of
187 S—been carefully considered ny you!
I had read the law over.” .V, - V
“Was this law considered, bywonwith refei^ l
ence to the Register’s reports to the Clerk of’
the District Court, to be sent by him to the
Attorney-General, showing the total amount of
ees, charges, cm olumentu «nn costs,of every
sort received or earned by him during the year
in each class of cases,—voluntary and comnul
soryl”
“Yes, sir.”
“ What was your opinion noon the question
as to whether the Register, in making a sworn
report, was bound under that law to report all
the fees or emoluments!”
“I have never expressed any opinion about
“ Did the Grand Jury ask tout opinion?”
“Tbei'did not”
“Did you have an opinion?”
u lf you want to know what I told the jury. I
can tell you.”
The Committee consulted together for a mo
ment, aud
Col. Cooper said he wanted Judge Bangs*
opinion, unless it was improper.
Mr. Knott—Go ahead.
Col. Cooper—What opinion did you have on
the question as to whether the Register is bound
under that clause!**
“ I think tlie law is ambiguous.**
“Please state wherein it is ambiguous?**
“I will do so, if the Committee desires.**
Air. Goudy—X will suggest to the Committee
that Judge Bangs is the District Attorney,
whose duty it will be to prosecute the indict
ment against Mr. Hibbard.
CoL Cooper—There has been no indictment in
reference to this matter against Mr. Hibbard;
that is the trouble.
The Chairman—ldo not know of any law that
would prevent the prosecuting attorney giving
an opinion about the statute, although there may
be cases growing out of that statute which it
would be his duty to prosecute.
Mr. Laphara—The difficulty I have is that the
witness has never expressed his opinion.
Judge Bangs—l never expressed it at all to
anybody before; I certainly did not to the
Grand Jury.
Col. Cooper—it is simply with reference to
some other questions that I am going to ask the
witness.
Mr. Campbell—What are the other questions?
Col. Cooper—You will know them. Mr. Camp
bell, when I ask them.
Ihe Chairman—As I suggested when the
question was put, as Judge Bangs has never ex
pressed an opinion, I do not see how it will
throw any light upon the facts that we are
alter.
Col. Cooper—Of course. I will take the judg
ment of the Committee on the matter, ilow
ever,_ he has now said that he thinks the law
a i Q k I J? UOU ?* ?bd the question he is asked now is
as to how it is ambiguous—in what manner the
lie has gotten that far, and
1 think, in justice to the witness, he ought to be
allowed to explain that.
The Chairman—Was there a question before
the Grand Jury as to the proper construction of
that clause to which attention has been called? •
Judge Bangs—There was this question, which
perhaps will answer that It appeared before
theGrandJury that Mr. Hibbard hod acted upon a
certain construction, which construction, as to
its correctness, had been bv some parties ques
tioned; aud my instruction to the Grand Jury,
as I remember, was that if Mr. Hibbard had iu
good faith acted upon the construction given to
it by himself, tliat the element of perjury was
wanting. I did not give anv construction to
the law. * •
The Chairman—You do not answer mv question,
after all. I ask you if the question of the con
struction of that clause was under discussion
before the Grand Jury—what was the true con
struction of it, whether that was discussed by
the Grand Jury?
Judge Bangs—X think it was; I think that
was considered.
“In your presence, was ft?**
u I think, perhaps, that is so.**
“Judge Trumbull was there, and'gave his
opinion as to the construction?**
“ Yes, sir.**
“You had your own opinion about it?”
“ 1 had not any settled opinion about it, sir.
I thought then, as I say now, and there is am
biguity about the Jaw, I did not say so.**
“Well, why did not you say so to the Grand
Jury?**
“ Simply because I was nos entirely satisfied
with my own opinion of the law.”
“As the prosecuting officer of thb Govern
ment, was it not proper for you, when this mat
ter was first under discussion, to advise yourself
as to it, and then advise the Grand Jury!”
“ I examined the law with a good deal of care,
and I came to the couclnsion that there was an
ambiguity there which was a sufficient basis for
two honest constructions,” ■ -
“ Wherein consists the ambiguity?”
“This statute provides for certain reports to
be made by several different Federal officers.
First, that it shall he the duty of the Marshal in
each district, in the month of July in each year,
to report to the Clerk of the District Court of
such district, in tabular lorm, first, the number
of cases in bankruptcy in which the warrant
prescribed by Sec, 5,019 of said act has come to
his hands during the year ending June HO pre-'
ceding; second, how many such warrants were
returned, with the fees, costs, expenses, and
emoluments thereof respectively and separately;
third, the total amount of all other fees, costs,
expenses, and emoluments, respectively and
separately, earned or received by him during
the year, for or in respect of any matter in
bankruptcy; fourth, a summarized statement
of such fees, costs, and emoluments, exclusive
of actual disbursements in each year; fifth, a
summarized statement of ail disbursements in
such cases for each year. Andin like manner every
Register shall for the same year make a report to
such clerk, first, of the number of voluntary
eases in bankruptcy coming before him during
each year; second, the amount of assets and lia
bilities of the bankrupt; third, the amount and
rate per centum of all dividends declared;
fourth, the disposition of all such cases; fifth,
the number of compulsory cases coming before
I him: sixth, the amount of assets and liabilities,
as nearly as may be, of such bankrupt; seventh,
the disposition of all such cases; eighth, the
amount and rate per centumof all dividends de
clared in such cases; ninth, the total amount of
fees, charges, costs, and emoluments of every
sort received creamed by such Register during
said year, in each class of cases above stated.
Here is where I understand the ambiguity came
in. X think it would not be an irrational conclu
sion or construction to say that the cases re
ferred to in the last clause respecting fees and
charges had reference to the cases which were
presented, voluntary and involuntary, to the
Register during that year.”
“Myinouiry is as to the ambiguity of the
law. That is what lam after.”
“The ambiguity is this: In the case of the
Marshal, it says be shall report the total
amount of all other fees and emoluments
eaned or received by him."
“That clause relates to the Marshal; show us
the ambiguity in the clause relating to the
Register.”
-The ambiguity is in not stating ‘ in all cases
whatever,’ but it says ‘in the above cases.’” •
“ What are the above cases!”
“ Cases of voluntary and involuntary bank
ruptcy that were presented during the year, in
whicli he makes his fees.”
“ Is that the language of the law i”
“Ido not know that I can make it any
plainer.”
Mr. Culberson—Under a proper construction
of that law, would the Register be required to
report the fees he received fora different year!”
“ I do not think be would be required at all.
I do not know of any good reason why be should
report such fees. There is no maximum limit,”
“Do you know any good reason why he
should not!”
u I do not; no, sir. I wish to say, now, that
lam still in doubt about the construction of
that law. lam trying to state why I thought
there was ambiguity in it.”
The Chairman—Does the ambiguity arise on
the face of the law itself, or becanse'there had
already been two constructions given?
44 1 never have analyzed the source of my
judgment about that.”
Col. Cooper—lf you had any doubt about the
construction of that law, why did not you tell
It to the Grand Jury ?
u It was simply because X did not wish to
throw any unnecessary obstacle in the way of
investigation fay the Grand Jury.”
“ I will ask you whether, during this exami
nation into tiie affairs of these officers in bank
ruptcy, all your questions to witnesses were not
with the view of getting oat everything in favor
of the parties whose affairs were being exam
ined, and nothing against them I”
‘‘No,-sir. It is not true.”
44 Did you not endeavor to draw out every
thing from the witnesses that were before the
Grand Jury in favor of Mr. Hibbard?”
44 1 aid noLV:
u There was a short-hand reporter before the
Grand Jury, was there not! **
“ I think there was.”
Col. Cooper sent for the stenographer to get
his notes of the testimony taken before the
Grand Jury, but was informed by that official
that be bad banded his notes over to the Dis
trict Attorney, and no longer had access to
them. * -
The witness further-testified that the Grand
Jury resolved to indict Mr. Hibbard for perjury
the day before the adjoarmuent. He did not
state his opinion' as - to the ambiguity in the law
to the Grand Jury, because be did not desire to
give any opinion of the law that was not settled
PRICE FIVE CENTS.
in bis oivn mind. He thought there wm
ambiguity in the law. The Grand Jury present
ed him a paper setting forth that they had
passed upon that point, and he prepared an in
dictment, which be intended to present to the
Grand Jurv.
“For what time did that intention in yonr
mind continue?”
“ 1 think till sometime in the after-part of
the dav (Friday) on which the Grand Jury were
discharged.”
INTERVIEWS WITH JUDGE BLOD
GETT.
“In what manner did that intention in yonr
mind become removed, or changed '!”
“Some time during the afternoon, I had an
Interview with Judge Blodgett, at bis chamber.”
“At your instance, or his!”
“ily recollection is a little indistinct. I think
I saw him twice; the first time was a very brief
interview.”
“Did you go in there of your own motion, of
did he invite you in there!”
“ Jiy_recollection is very indistinct, but 1
think'when I first went in 1 went in casually.”
“ When you went in casually, what did be say
to you, and what did you say !”
“The two conversations are a little blended
in my recollection!”
“ So far as you can separate them, 1 wish yon
would give me the first one now.”
14 At first, the question of the indictment for
perjury came up, precisely how 1 do not re
member. The Judge was in court all day, and
about 3 o’clock in the afternoon I went to him
and told him it would be impossible to get these
indictments ready, so as to have the jury return
them by the ordinary hour of adjournment.
The Judge remarked that he would remian, and
I asked him it he could stay till after supper.
He said, it necessary, he would stay in town
all night, and not go home. 1 went in about
6or 7 o'clock in the evening again to Jndgo
Blodgett’s room, and nerhans the question arose
as to what the perjury was based upon. My
recollection is more distinct as to the second in
terview ; I had entirely forgotten the first, un
til my attention was called to it by Judge
Blodgett about two weeks ago.”
‘ “ You went in there, as I understand, casual
ly!”
“ Yes, air.”
“ You did uot go in there to get instructions
from the Judge, did you?”
“I do not remember, i bad frequent con
versations with the Judge.”
“ Can you remember whether you went into
Judge Blodgett’s room in the afternoon of that
Friday for the purpose of getting his instruc
tions or judgment of the law with reference to
Uiis perjury indictment against Mr. Hiobard?”
“ I do not remember whether I did or not.”
u What is your best recollection?”
“ 1 may have done so. I know the question
of the construction of the law came up; whether
r it was in the afternoon or evening 1 ad not now
* remember.”
“ When did you have the indictment for
perjury drawn!”
u lt was not finished. I bad it copied; it
was drawn very hastily, and interlined, :ind the
copy was finished about 7 o’clock. There were
two Indictments; that for taking illegal fees
was among the last that was finished. lam not
quite sure whether Mr. Thomson or Mr. Boal
drew that. Mr. Thomson drew the perjury in
dictment, and Mr. Baldwin copied it. I have
not seen it since that night. I never took it
before the Grand Jury. I did not stop Mr.
Baldwin copying it; finished it after dark.
It was late in the evening—between 6 and 8
o’clock—when 1 went into the Graud-Jnry room
and offered to produce all the other indict
ments, except the perjury indictment, for sig
nature. I met Judge Blodgett, or a messenger
from him, just 1 had come from the Grand-Jury
room. Ido not now remember whether it was a
messenger or whether it was the Judge; per
haps it was Adam, the colored mao. I remem
ber some one said the Judge was looking fur me,
and wanted to sec me; and 1 turned and went
right back. 1 have not a definite recollection as
to what he- wanted to see me about, but if I
was to give'- my impression it would be that it
was with reference to this matter of the indict
ment.”
“Do you mean to say that if you have any
impression, it you did want to see the
Judge before yoiijgot word that be wanted to
see vou?”
“ Ko, I didn’t say I said if I had any
impression about it. it would be that the busi
ness was respecting this indictment.”
tk \Ve know what the business was. “What I
want to know is if roar desire was with reference
to seeing and consulting Judge Blodgett in the
case?”
“ I don’t rememberthat I had any desire.”
“Isn’t it toot best recollection that you
didn’t have any desire on the subject?”,-.
“I have no recollection one way or the
other.”
Mr. Knott—“lf von hadn’t been sent for to
go to Judge Blodgett’s room, or hadn’t‘seen
him, would yon not have taken the indictment
up and presented it to the Grand Jury?”
“I think I would, sir.”
Col. Cooper—You think you would?
u Undoubtedly I would, if I had it drawn.
One of my men worked ail night nearly to get
through with it.”
“You would then have signed it and returned
into Court naditnot been for your interview
with Judge Blodgett? ”
“I think I would.”
“ I want you to state jnst as definitely and
particularly as you can what Judge Blodgett
said to you.”
“ The question of the perjury indictment came
up, but how I don’t remember ”
“ What did Judge Blodgett say, as near os
you can remember?”
“X remember distinctly of his asking what
they had assigned perjury on.”
“ How did be know that they assigned per
jury on anything i”
“Why, ft was common talk that they passed
the indictment,”
“ Did you tell Judge Blodgett they had?”
“ I think very likely. I don’t remember.”
“ Well, wbat did be say?”
“He asked wbat they had assigned perjury
for. or what they based it upon. I told him it
was upon the reports, and I happened to have a
copy of them in my pocket and took it out and
said, * Here is a sample of the jurat to the re
port.’ ”
“ Couldn’t assign perjury on the report when
there was some matter in the report that was
false,—did you tell him wbat that was?”
“ 1 don’t remember the exact language, but 1
gave him to understand the charge was
that he bad ramie a false report of bis fees and
had sworn to them, and that they assigned per
jury upon that oath.”
“What did .Judge Blodgett say to that? ”
“My recollection is that I told him the report
was made under the nineteenth section of the
amendment of the Bankruptcy act, and I took
up a volume that happened to lie on the table
and turned to it, and at once the Judge—he
recognized the fact—said it didn’t sacra right,
or was wrong, or something or other, or that it
wasn’t right to indict Hibbard for pcrjnry for
that reason, because the Register had come to
him when the law went in force for his construc
tion, and he had given the construction under
which Hibbard had acted and made his report.”
“How did he know whatconstructiou Hibbard
had acted under? ”
“I don’t know.”
“He assumed that, did he? ”
“ I dou’t know an vthiog about that.”
“ Didn’t he assume it in conversation!”
“I will tell you his statement. He said that
it was wrong, or improper, or wasn’t right, to
charge Mr. Hibbard with perjury upon that,
because, when the law weut into effect, or abont
the time, or soon after, the Register came u*
him for a construction with reference to that
point,—as to the making of the report,—
and that be gave the construction of the law
under which the report of Hibbard was made.”
Mr. Knott—Did he say that he had told Hib
bard be could lawfully suppress informatiou as
to any fees or emoluments received during the
year of cases referred to him during that year?”
“There was no particular reference to those
respects at all. In fact the whole conversation
occupied but & little time.”
Col. Cooper—Did vou tell him what the
Grand Jury had found with reference to Hib
bard’s report,—what the facts were?
“ I tola him they bad found an indictment.* 4
“No, no,” said Col. Cooper, impatiently,
“ did you tell him wbat facts had been brought
before the Grand Jury with reference to bis
fees?” •
“ I didn’t tell him anything about It- The
whole conversation didn’t occupy over threa or
five minutes.”
“ And did Judge Blodgett*aav to you that
Judge Drummond agreed with nim ; ta (he con
struction of mis law?”
“That question perhaps—-*»
“ I want an answer, yes or no.** <
“I can’t answer it yes or no.”
“U you made ttuu aWfmeiK to tie Omnd ‘

xml | txt