Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1901-11-30

efforts were actually successful, and
that a judge wcs procured to try the
cases before any of them were reached
for trial, and the cases were not tried,
not because a judge could not be pro-
cured to try them, but because Of crop
conditions existing in Richland county
at the time. After a good deal of per-
suasion, Judge Cowan finally consented
to come to Wahpeton to sit in the trial
Of these cases, and his communication
to me to that effect was made part of
the record and was before the supreme
court. This demonstrated conclus-
lively that I had not only performed my
legal duty in that regard, but that I
had performed it successfully. With
this bald, naked fact before the court,
why spread over a half dozen typewrit-
ten pages in a vain endeavor to show
a neglect Of duty in this respect Of my
part? AS I have said, the cases in
question were not tried ait the July
term of court simply and solely because
of existing crop conditions at that
time. The facts in regard to that
matter were these, and let it be remem-
bered that these facts were, not ven
denied; indeed they could not we'll be
denied as they were facts within the
common knowledge of every nan in
this county. The July term began
on the End day of that month, and up
until the 18th day of the month I was
engaged in the trial of criminal cases
and other important cases which I was
qualified to try. 1t will be remem-
bered that during all the month of July
the weather was extremely hot and that
grain ripened very rapidly, and harvest
came in this locality more than ten
days earlier than usual. AS early as
the 10th day of July jurors were clam
oring ito be excused and to be permitted
to return to their homes. On the 18th
day of July the jury came to me in a
body, with a written petition, urging
and imploring me to permit them to go
home and attend to their duties on
their farms. The panel consisted of
thirty jurors, twenty-eight of whom
were farmers engaged in general farm
ing-many Of them quarter section
tanners who with their families do most
of their w work and hire very little
holm 1yncUrr royyro1F +1o% - 1or-o - ~
of the work of haying had already been
done and that oats and barley were
ripe and were then being harvested
and that wheat harvest was rapidly ap-
preaching. With these conditions be-
fore me I felt it my duty to hasten the
work OF the term and discharge the
jury as soon as possible, and I then
stated to the members of the panel
that Is soon as the criminal cases were
disposed of l would discharge them
and adjourn the term to a later date
for the trial of the court cases. This
did on the 2Sth day of July. The
u~ndisputed testimony showed that
nearly all of the jurors went directly
from the court house to the harvest
field.
And right here a question is raised
in which the supreme court. and myself
take positions Numerically opposed.
believed when the jury was dis
charged, and still believe, that under
the circumstances it was my duty to
discharge them. The supreme court
takes the position that, admitting that
conditions were exactly as represented
land indeed there was no dispute on
that point, I should nevertheless have
forced that jury, % of whom were
farmers, to remain in attendance upon
court, although as a consequence a
large proportion of their crop would
have been lost. Now there is a
square issue between myself and the
supreme court, and I dare say, when
the opinion is analysed from beginning
to end, it will be found that it is really
the only question between us. The
opinion may be swelled by a discussion
of other and immaterial questions, but
it will be found upon analysis that the
whole case hinges upon the question
as to whether as a district judge, had
the right and authority, and whether
it was my duty, under the circum-
stances shown to have existed, to dis
charge the jury at that time. And
SO far as I am concerned I am perfectly
willing to stand before the people, the
bar and the bench of this state on the
proposition. 1t was undisputed that
nearly all Of the cases in question had
been on the calendar of causes for
trial at the previous term. This term
began ON the Sth day of January and
continued until nearly the middle Oh
March, and it was shown c~onclusively
and not denied, that at that term OF
court ample opportunity was given tc
try every case on the calendar, and
ranged for the especial accom1noda.
\ Ii - 10 go * fEa 49, = * - - -. Il 4 E