Little Falls herald. [volume] (Little Falls, Morrison County, Minn.) 1889-1950, 1904-10-07

SHALL THE BRAND n JURY. =,
#sS:.s VI. !. ABOLISHEDi ca
The people OF the stats 81 Minnaantia
win vote this fsll On q amendm,ennt
to the constitution whichzif adoptSd!
would sbolish grand juriss. soch +
great change in the legal system 81
the state deserves more attentio thu,
IL being paid to It. There are arm.
ments on both sides. Among the areu.
ments for abolition sre, Those.
That the grand jury 10 needless
expense; that 1t 10 often packed: that
grand juries sometimes blindlys follow
the lead Of the prosecuting officer, in.
stead Of being independent; that
grand juries have been he..vehicles Of
wrong done to innocent men; that
grand jnries rarely exercise all their
powers, peculiarly those which would
benefit the people; that grand juries
are often dominated by favoritism
and not impartiality; that grand jur-
les rarely pay attention to anything
beyond cases brought before them,
and do not exercise their powers Of
investigation into the conduct Of pub
lie Offices In answer to most Of these
objections 1t may be said that these
faults, when they occur. are not
faults of tho system, but Of the off,
Gals.
The arguments against the abolition
of the grand jury are we'll presented
by writer in the last issue of the
Duluth Labor World, from (which the
following is taken:
The grand jury system, with its
many changes and notifications,
dates back to the forty-second year of
the reign of Edward III. Formerly it
was composed Of twenty-four members
and always required twelve members
to concur in an accusation, but fire.
quently there were twelve for and
twelve againat, and to avoid that Sit
uation one was dropped, 80 that we
now have twenty-three members. with
sixteen for q quorum and still twelve
must concur in iniinding an indict-
ment.
The grand jury came into use in
England after many iniquitous prose-
cutions Of innocent persons, who were
victims to the subserviency of the
crown officers in proceedings by in
formation. That is the method of
procedure proposed by those who now
want to abolish the grand jury in
this state.
The attaches of the court today are
too willing to trust themselves and
over confident, that they will not
err in the administration of swift JUS
tees.
The functions of the grand jury are
generally prescribed by statute to be
their duty, to inquire into all indict.
able offenses committed or triable in
the county, as well as the case of
every person imprisoned in the county
Jail and not indicted.
Besides these ordinary duties, Ger.
tain others Of special character are
deputed to them. It Is the duty of
the grand jury to inspect the county
jail, for the purpose of examining its
security, sanitary condition and dis
cipline; to inquire into the wiltull
and corrupt misconduct in Office of
public officers of every description
within the county. They occupy
place in the realm of governmental
prerogative, between the people and
their chosen officials and are clothed
with power to call anyone of the pub
lie servants to render an account Of
his stewardship at any time when
they are properly assembled. That
their duties may be performed with
out obstruction ,the4grand jury is gen.
orally granted free access to public
prisons and to all public records of
the county. They must also examine
into the condition of the county tre-
esury ). sometimes perform the duties
of county commissioners inspect the
bonds Of the county officers, with re-
gard to their correctness and suifi-
cheney; examine the tax collector q
books, his reports and settlements;
ascertain whether the several towns of
the county have been duly assessed :;
whether the officers have collected
and expended the tax for the support
Of schools as required by law; make
q careful examination Of the condi-
tion of the accounts of the collecting
officers of the county, dockets of the
justices of the peace and any other
matter relating to the general school
funds.
In case of the abolition of the grand
Jury, who shall diecharoa all fhoso