The Kalispell bee. [volume] (Kalispell, Mont.) 1900-192?, 1900-12-13
on their action as jurors could not
be established

on their action as jurors could not
be established
The court goes ON TO cite several
cases in point. Continuing, the
court says:
considering the circumstances in
this case, it would be presumed that
counsel for the defendant had knowl-
edge of these publications; their at
tention had been called to one of
them by one of the attorneys for the
plaintiff in open court. Anyone who
read the daily papers in Helena at
the time could hardly escape reading
them; that they were instigated or
written by persons friendly to the
defendant, their contents leave no
room for doubt. l would go further
and hold, however, that if it can be
established that the verdict of the
jury was influenced by anyone, even
though not a party to the suit,
or relative or friend of such par
ties, it ought not to stand. The ver-
dict of jury should be the result
of it's unbiased action. When jury
is influenced by such articles as are
presented in this case it is difficult
to prove who instigated them. 1t is
claimed, however, that the plaintiff
ought to have had the parties publish
ing these articles brought into court
and punished for contempt, or ought
to have applied to the court for con-
tinuance of the cause on account OF
the prejudice created by them, and
a failure so to do, waived the right to
present this question upon a petition
for new trial. 1t was extremely
doubtful as to the right of plaintiff
to ask that the publishers of this
newspaper be brought into court and
examined upon the charge of con-
tempt"
The court then quotes from the re-
vised statutes, showing it's limited
power for Furnishing contempt, and
concluding says:
"The Independents publishers seem
to have been advised of the limited
power of the court in this matter; for
in the publication of that paper i'm
mediately after Colonel Sanders had
called attention to it's articles, it re-
fers to the fact that it had not
brought it's paper into court or hawk
ed it in the presence of the court.
'To require party to a suit. when
newspaper publishes an article cal
culated to prejudice the jury and
community against him to apply to
the court for continuance, or to be
deemed to have waived all complaint
on account of such publication would
require an act which think no court
would impose. 1t ought not to be
that newspaper could force a party
to continue his cause by scurrillous
attack upon him, and one calculated
to bias a jury against him. He might
never be as fully prepared for trial
again as at that time, and what guar
antee would he have that the same
tactics would not be again resorted
to at the next term?
'The time perhaps has arrived
when the courts should say that the
dominating and powerful public press
should not be used to influence judi
cial proceedings, to bias it's jurors
and intimidate it's officers.
There was a substantial conflict
in the evidence in the case upon the
material question at issue and hence
on the ground that the verdict was
against the evidence this court can
not set aside the verdict, although it
might have come to a different con
clusion than that of the jury upon
the facts. But upon the ground
that there was undue influence exert
ed as to the jury by the Objectionable
publications hereinbefore referred to
the court will grant new trial. The
verdict is set aside and new tria
granted.