St. Paul daily globe. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1884-1896, 1885-08-03
THE GAMBLING ROW.
Judge Nelson's Explanation

NeteOnVp E1pfaudttOIs
To the Editor of the GLOBE:
Gamblers Lightly Dealt With" heads an
article in the issue of the Pioneer Press of
yesterday, rejecting on my official action
in the gambling cases before me in the
municipal court on Saturday last, where
fore l desire to lay the true facts thereof
before the public: The police captain of
this city had one man arrested on the charge
of keeping a gambling house, and four on
the charge of gambling; from tue alleged
keeper of the house the captain had taken
as bail for his appearance the sum of 500,
and S25 from each of the others. When
the cases were called two of the men failed
TO answer, and their bail was forfeited.
Mr.. Martin, the alleged keeper, and one of
the other men asked for a continuance
of their cases until Aug. 10, on
the ground. they claimed. that they
had no attorney and wanted time TO prepare
their defense. / considered that contin-
uance until the Sd inst. was sufficient. and
told them that if they then could show the
court sufficient ground for further contin-
uance it could be granted then.
Mr.. Martins bail l raised 500, making it
$500, and allowed the other mans bail 70
remain. One of the men accused Of gambling
claimed he was ready for trial, and his trial
was proceeded with, during the progress Of
which the captain
UTTERLY FAILED
to produce any evidence to show the mans
guilt beyond that he, the captain, had found
him in a gambling house, and this man was
in obedience to the law of the land dis
charged,
What is there In the above to be so Sc
verely criticised?
That did not force the men to their
trials contrary to law; that did not pre-
sumo the men guilty, simply because they
had been. arrested; that / did not fine each
of them 500 without trial; that dis
charged one man because the captain
utterly failed to prove his charge against
him; that l allowed the men a reasonable
continuance of their cases, to which even
man accused of gambling is entitled under
the constitution; that l declared the two
S25 bail, which had been taken by the cap
tain, forfeited because of failure of ap-
pearance of the parties; that l raised Mr..
Martins bail 800 over and above the
amount taken by the captain?
The captain has experience enough, and
if he has not he ought TO have, to know
that it is the practice of the municipal court
to forfeit the amount of bail, taken by an
officer to secure the appearance of party
under arrest before the court, and that the
amount Of the bail so taken is considered
sufficient fine should the party fail
TO appear; and why did not
the captain take higher bail than S25 in
the gambling cases referred to, if he
thought that the forfeiture OF a twenty
1ive-dollar bail was too mild an action of
the court? The captain has had
EXPERIENCE AS a DETECTIVE.
and ought to know how to secure sufficient
legal evidence to secure the conviction of a
gambler, but if he does not l will advise
him free of charge. The well-known and
old-established rule of law is that every
man is presumed innocent until his guilt
has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt;
and any citizen accused of any offense and
brought before the municipal court of this
city while l preside, who desires different
presumption, him advise to have his case
transferred to another judge; because will
not attempt to shake the foundation of
American liberty.
FREDERICK NELSON,
Special Judge Municipal Court.