The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1893-12-14
GRAND JURY CHARGED.
JUDGE MORRIS TRLLs THRM TaEY
EXCEEDED THEIR AUTHORITY.
Thatrhsir BUSINESS is to Find Ind ictmsnts
for Violation Of the Law and Not to
Criticize the County Government.
Proceedings Mus5 Be Secret.


charge to the grand jury yesterday
morning on their reassembling after
recess. 1t is quite an intere ting doc,
ument Read it.
AUSTIN, Tex, Dec, II, 1893.
Gentlemen of the Grand Jury:
At the close of your last session you
presented report to the court and
took recess Tor several weeks, by
consent OF the court, before the court
had time to fully understand and ap-
preciate the nature OF the report
which the grand jury presented, and
to determine the duty of the court
with respect to said repor.
Having since then fully considered
the nature Of said report, the court
feels that it has g duty TO perform
with respect to said report and the
grand jury (Which is a component
part of said court), and the court will
therefore avail itself of the opportuni-
ty afforded by the reconvening of the
grand jury to discharge that duty.
Without questioning the motives of
the grand jury, and assuming that
they have acted within what they
deemed to be the scope of their pow
ers and duties, 1t becomes the duty Of
the court to advise the grand Jury
that in making said report they have
exceeded the power of the grand jury.
And the court, If 1t fails to discharge
lis duty In the premises, will be moro
in fault than the grand jury, because
the grand jury acts under the advice
of the court upon law questions. The
The report which the grand jury have
made discloses the evidence taken by
the grand jury In its investigation of
county finances and shows that the
grand jury did not find that there has
been violation Of the penal laws by
the county officials, whose acts the
grand jury have investigated, for
which indictments should be present.
ed; and Notwithstanding this, the re-
port enters at length into criticism
of the management of the county fl
nances, and especially the making of
certain contract by the county
commissioners court for the plac-
ing of steam heaters Ia the
rooms of the county court
house, all of which the grand
jury condemns as involving an ex.
travagant and uncalled for use of thu
county's money, and as not sufficient
ly guarding the interests of the coun-
ty. The grand jury also ventures
their opinion as to other matters of
mismanagement of county affairs by
county officers.
1t is not the purpose of this court to
give any opinion as to the correctness
or error of the facts or conclusions
found by the grand jury in their re-
port; for If this cou should do SO, the
court would be guilty of the same
error which IL seeks to advise the
grand jury against. What the court
wishes to impress upon the grand jury
in this connection Is that II is no part
of the duty of the grand jury, and 1t IL
beyond its powers and functions to
critic Sc or give its opinions as body
as to the management vi county
affairs, which are intrusted by law to
the management of other courts or
officials, except In the form of an In
dictment of such officers for
the violation of some penal
statute. Under the organiza.
tiona of the county government
the powers and duties of administer
ing public affairs and enforcing the
laws are distributed among different
officers and agencies to whose judg-
ment and management the people
commit different powers and duties;
and 1t is not lawful for one officer, or
branch of the public service to inter-
fere with, or crlticise the judgment,
acts or management of any other de-
partment, except to the extent that
one officer, court or authority, Is spec
tally vested by law with authority
over another.
Under the laws of this state 1t is the
duty of the grand jury to present in.
dictments against all public officials
Of the state, county and city for viola.
tion by them of the penal laws gov
erning their respective official action;
but the duties and powers OF the grand
jury are limited solely to presenting
indictments for violations OF penal
laws, and do not authorize report Of
the evidence which they may have
taken about official action not proving
q violation of the penal laws, or re-
port Of the opinion Of the grand
Jury as to what action ought in
their judgment to have been
taken or not taken by other officials
in matters committed by the laws Of
the state to the discretion and judg-
ment of other officials.
Article 393 of the Code Of Criminal
procedure of this state reads as fol-
lows:
"The deliberations of the grand
jury shall be secret and any member
OF the body, or bailiff, who divulges
anything transpiring before them, In
the course of their official duties, shall
be liable to O fine, as for contempt Of
the court, not exceeding 500, and to
imprisonment not exceeding five
days"