Lewiston teller. [volume] (Lewiston, North Idaho) 1878-1900, 1880-03-12
y.Age Back. Charge to the Grand sur,
Tho following is the charge of Judge
Buck to the Territorial Grand Jury:

BUCK 70 the 1errltOrlaI Grand Jury:
Gentiemen Of the Jury:
The law prescribes that the court
shall give you such information in re-
gard to your duties as it may deem
proper.
The object Of grand jury, under
our government is now very generally
understood by the people. 1t has
long been part of the machinery by
which crime has been punished and it
is also one Of the safeguards by which
the liberties of the people are protect
ed from the Entertainments of power.
There are, however many who claim
that the grand jury system is "A useless
arm Of the law which incurs heavy ex
pensc on the county without adequate
return, but considerable experience as
= prosecuting officer has led me to feel
that it is, notwithstanding its defects.
one of the most efficient aids to good |
government, Experience has shown
that large proportion of the griev-
ances or supposed grievances which are
brought to the attention Of grand jur-
les are ignored and theexpense of tria's
which ought never to be commenced
are saved to the taxpayers. A single
trial Of ordinary length incons;derate-
~ urged forward under the systems
which prevail in some states where the
grand jury system is abolished, would
cost the people more than the expense
Of = grand jury for an entire term of
court. A grand jury should act as
break on the passions, prejudicies and
N will Of community. and when exer>
eising its power with prudence protects
the reputation Of the innocent as we'll
q aids in the punishment Of the guilty.
OF the particular cases which may be
brought before you it is not necessary
for mo to speak. The prosecuting
officer is your legal adviser and you
are at liberty to call upon the court
for any special instruction which you
may desire.
/ will, however call your attention
to the nature of the evidence which
should be offered before you. ! do
this particularly because l believe
much Of the inconsiderate action Of
grand juries, and consequent criticism
upon the system results from improp-
er evidence heard by them. refer
particularly to what is known as hear
say evidence, evidence which, on the
the trial Of = charge would not be adj
mitted, and which ought not to be
heard BY grand jury. BY hearsay
evidence We mean that kind of evil
dence wherein the witness states not
what he knows Of his own personal
knowledge, but what some other per-
son has told him. By listeningt to that
kind Of evidence it often happens that
the time Of the grand jury is worse
than wasted in listening to common
rumor and neighborhood gossip, in
stead Of brief and simple statement
Of facts a. personally known to the
witness. This loose talk sometimes is
tho foundation upon which the charae>
ter and liberty Of men are put in jeop-
/ ardy by indictments found on evidence
which should never have been given.
The result 10 that the prosecuting Off
Ger. whose duty it is to prosecute the
indictments, finds himself in the awk-
ward position Of trying case in court
with one kind Of evidence when the
charge has been found by grand jury
on entirely different and incompetent
kind Of evidence.
To guard against this the law author
ises the prosecuting officer to appear
before you and interrogate the witness,
o.. As rule when he has examined
tho witness he has called out, all the
facts which constitute legal evidence.
The temptation is sometimes great to
those not acquainted with the danger
of calling out incompetent evidence to
60 further and lead the witness to tell