The Mineral argus. [volume] (Maiden, Mont.) 1883-1886, 1885-04-30
ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE IN MEacHeR
COUNTY.


remarks thereon, the Helena Hcral,
OF the s5d inst says:
The MINERAL ARGUS of the I6tl
ilndS faux because the grand Jury. a
lee recent term of court, did not fint
Il single Indictment. In the report O
IN grand jury, as published in tn,
iusbandman, they say: ave hav,
found indictments of very great i'm
porlance to the people" Al woulc
seem that one or the other must he
mistaken. and further, that the grand
jury would be most likely to know.
The grand jury's report would
lead one TO lnler that there was some
good cause for the action of the dis.
tflct attorney, as well as for its own. in
saying, I'VE severely censure the high
handed, arbitrary and illegal methods
used by the justic-S in this county for
the SIX months last past" In
tins report special mention is made O,
the justices courts at Maiden as lend
ihS themselves 'to crafty personal ami
mosliies OF private parties" and further
oi s't'ihg apparently to uphold by
poadlnS and adjusting in court their
own or friends cases. and with a total
disregard OF law and evidence and
practical good sence." After this we
can h'rdiy see how the ARGUS can al
mere To It's statement tha, the grand
Jury found no indictments. for tbi, is
about as serious an Indictment rs
could well be found inside or outside
OF a jury room.'
Our report Of the court PROCEEDINGS
was, OF necessity, gathered from vari.
Gus citizens who had just returned from
the county-seat, all of whom expressed
substantially what we stated. Later
the mail brought us Ms copy of the
grand jury's report, that stated sin
dlctments had been found" vet the
parties against whom such indictment,
had been found were bound over TO
next term of court Conveniently !
pur statement to the contrary was in
part correct-the grand iurv finlinp
20 indictment to submit for trial at
hat term.
The reprimand to .,he Justices as
;lted by the Herald. and to which We
eierred in the issue containing the
grand jury report, was, We concede. an
Indictment OF peculiar and agsravat-
nS character. yet in some respects was
lot a true bill" while in Others 4
Justly merited rebukc.
The Herald says further:
In glanclng over some numbers of
he ARGt :. placed in our hands hv cur
oriner town5man, Wm. Mcfarland.
50. We should judge th3t the editors
4 that paper have at times shared the
-eIinSs and convictions expressed bv
nc grand jury, and in all liklnood
ave furnished some of the material :
nat found expression there Ii
We have always advocated the i'm /,
ortance of Justices courts in ,hinlv
;tticd counties of vast aiea. as the =,
roper way to preven, more expensive =
ia!s at the county-scat. and a. re u
ovlnS the prcteXt and necesSit, of +"
'ople taking the law into their own
'hds and administering uncerenori :
Is justice. But 1t would seem as II ol
ere was more sometimes to fear from n.
Stices' courts than from the vioa,or
law or lynch courts. Ii must have
'cn pretty serious pervcrsions Of law !"
III justice To have influenced Iu1nr eA
ade to say anything in his charge t, lii
c grand jury 'Sayoring strongly q
lch law ~,
We know nothing Of any particula X
ae' before judge or jury OF distriG n
orney, and our remarks therefor onl-
itan To 4 general view OF the sltut
n presented in the grand jun, a;
11't and A2Gr-' criticism. But the III
counts II cases a> a>narfatc IS in,er tu
ct parties IN some OF the courts ui >e'
tirc. moi a hun,,rc,l mics from
'''cn. would satisfy any man talti 49,.
rh1r-es OF the grand i,uy are not :.
- 'lrawr and that lynrh ilv woull
a ."rS step toward Justice and IL ''
irlrd administration 'i.i
Nr VIM. Mcforllnd na> "vpprnial
n il"t> to The editor oi lhr Herald .
riding our views, A. expressed :,
a1Gh the column, Of the ARGv,. on t,y