The mirror. (Stillwater, Minn.) 1894-1925, 1898-04-21
Written for The Prison Mirror.
THE G.. J. SYSTEM.

In this age of enlightenment it is
surprising that anything as absurd and
barbaric as the present grand jury
system is upheld. There is seldom a
session of this grotesque body but
what one or more reputable citizens
are unjustly condemned to defend
their good names before a jury. In
dicted, not absolutely because of any
apparent connection with the case or
probable guilt, but more so for the
reason that the proceedings are entirely
ex parte-nothing favorable to the
defense being allowed, making that
one course most positive. True, it is
intended for commendable purpose,
viz, as safeguard for the due protec-
tion of civil liberty by preventing vex-
atious and vindictive prosecutions.
But how as to the method of proceed
ure? AT the proceedings which are
entirely ex parte and at which much
the larger proportion of the business
transacted is regularly brought for
ward by the prosecuting attorney, no
evidence is admitted in favor of the
accused. The law also provides: 'that
return of an Indictment shall indi-
cate that in their (the grand jury's)
opinion the evidence against the ac
cused is of sufficient weight to justify
his being brought to trial; that it
should be sufficient to convict him,
unless he offers evidence in his defense
at the trial."
Certainly, this procedure does
great deal of good at times in prevent
ing veXatiOus and vindictive prosecu-
tions; but can we remain Indifferent to
the fact that at almost every session of
this body one or more reputable and
honest men have their good names
blemished unjustly; stand adjudged
by this body guilty of some felony
until disproved by jury. You might
say the grand jury when returning an
Indictment but decides that the evi-
dence against the accused is of suffi-
cient weight to justify his being
brought to trial, and that it should be
sufficient to convict him unless he
offers evidence in his defense at the
trial. That may appear just, but what
is the ultimate effect? In one very
recent occurrence corporation was
affected by theft and the guilty party
or parties to it could not be placed. In
the effort to shoulder the loss upon
someone else, by the aid of detective
agency they had little difficulty in
getting indictments by the grand jury
against several reputable citizens, who
were thereupon confined to Jail. I'M
mediately these citizens were dis
charged from their employment.
Their names were advertised through
out as connected with the theft They
were subjected to all the vexations
consequent thereto. When the time
for trial matured the county attorney
moved to have each dismissed in that
he believed him innocent and that
there was insufficient evidence to con-
vict, or that the evidence was insuffi-
cient to warrant trial Here is but
mild instance of one Of the many that
occur most frequently.
In the common actions at law
wherein one man is accused of owing
another sum of money, the defendant
is brought into court and is permitted
to put in his defense against the COM
plant, and unless the evidence pre-
ponderates in favor of the complaining
party it fails-a proceeding under
which both parties are heard, before
any conclusion or decree is expressed
and also in accordance with the funda-
mental theory of our government that
no citizen shall be struck by the hand
of law without being first amply heard
in his own defense. Courts and juries
sit in judgment to decide rights affect
ing the defendant as we'll as the COM
plainant-to administer equity as be-
tween the parties. Therefore, why-by