The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1901-11-16
GOES TO WORKH0USE
SUPREME COURT AFFIRMs SEN
PENeE IMPOSED ON FRED
A. BRIGGS
NEW TRIAL ON ONE CHARGE
NickeI-in-the-slot Crusade in Min
neapolis Is SuccessfuI-De-
cfsion Written by Chief
Justice.


preme court from the judgment of Judge
sJcGee, OF the district court of Hennepin
county, Fred A. Briggs, convicted in con-
neclion with the notorious nickel-ln-ths-
slot machine cases in Minneapolis some
few months ago, gets new trial In one
OF the cases appealed. In the other case,
Eowever, the Judgment Of the trial court
whereby Briggs was found guilty ami
sentenced to the maximum penalty of six
months in the workhouse and fine Of
$500, was affirmed.
The charges against Briggs grew out
of a crusade made against the saloon
keepers of Minneapolis who had i'll their
places of business nickel-in-the-slot ma
chimes of certain kind, which it was de-
termined were gambling devices. In the
trial of these saloonkeeperS it WAS de-
veloped that Briggs acted as agent for
the manufacturers or owners of the ma
chimes and induced the saloonkeepers 20
place them in their saloons. Upon ac-,
8cusationS to that effect a number of in
dictments against Briggs for violating
the laws against gambling were returned
by the grand jury Two of the cases
were tried in the district court before
Judge MCGEE and Briggs was convicted
of having induced one saloonkeeper
named Erickson and another named Oh
son to install in their places of business
the machines referred to- In each of the
cases the maximum sentence was i'm
posed, making the cumulative penalty,
one year in the. workhouse with a fine of
$500. Motion for new trial was denied in
each case, and upon this denial the eases
were appealed.
Decision of Chief Justice
The supreme court decision in the mat
ter, which was filed yesterday, is writ
ten by Chief Justice Start. The lower
court is sustained in all of the points
raised in the trial of the Erickson case,
but the judgment in the Olson case is
reversed and the appellant granted p
new trial on the ground that Briggs did
not have that temperate and, impartial
trial to which a person accused of
crime is entitled.
The supreme court does not, in the
opinion, discuss the rulings, orders and
statements of the trial judge which con-
stitute the record in the Olson case upon
which the new trial is granted, but
states that on the lecord as a whole the
defendant is entitled to a new trial, al
though there is no ona error which, talk
en- by itself, would be sufficient to Justify
such ruling.
The syllabus, which covers both cases,
is as follows:
State of Minnesota. respondent VS. Fred
: A. Briggs, appellant; State of Mime
sofa, respondent, VS.. Fred A. Briggs,
appellant.
The defendant was convicted upon two
separate indictments of the crime of
Keeping a gambling device and appealed
from the judgments. Held:
1. Where party does not personally
commit crime but procures it to be
committed, the Indictment may by virtue
OF g.. S. 1894, sec. G310. charge him
directly with it's commission as if he
personally committed it, or he may be
directly charged as a principal by alleg-
ing the facts, which, at common law,
would make him an accessory before the
fact.
q The indictments in these cases charge
that the defendant did induce and pro-
cure another to keep a gambling device
designed to be used in gambling and
they are not open to the objection that
they are not direct and certain as to the
circumstances of the alleged offense.
Nor do they charge two offenses.
3. They sufficiently describe the gamb-
ling device by alleging that it is nickel.
in-the-Slot machine, a more particular de-
scription of which is to the grand jury
unknown.
4. In one of the cases the verdict is
sustained by the evidence and the trial
court did not err in it's instructions to
the jury, nor in its refusal to give GER
tain requests to charge made by the de-
PENDANT But in the other case it is held
upon a consideration of the whole rec
ord that the defendant did not have that
temperate and impartial trial which was
his due.
Judgment affirmed in one case and re-
versed in the other and a new trial grant
ed. Start, j.