The Saint Paul globe., 1905-01-15
NEWS OF THE CITY
LAWYERS OPPOSED TO
GRAND JURY CHANGE
Ramsey County Bar Goes on
Record Against Proposed
Legislation

Legislation
Discussing last night after dinner at
| the Commercial club, ITO What FIX
tent the Grand Jury Should Be Abol-
! ished," the Ramsey County Bar asso-
citation decided that the jury should
not be abolished in any respect Only
one of four representative members of
the association was willing that. in
case of persons charged with minor
| felonies, trial might be had on infor-
nation.
But Senator George r. Laybourn, of
Duluth, a guest of the association, ex-
planned that when the people Of the
state adopted last fall by a large ma
/ jority a constitutional amendment per-
| mftting the abolition Of the grand jury,
they acted under a mistaken under
standing Of the intent of the legisla-
Fture. He and other legislators that
had caused the amendment to be sub
mitted to the people did not intend to
abolish the grand jury altogether, but
! merely to do away with such of it's
| sessions as were not needed.
| Senator Henry A. Morgan, of Albert
Lea, was the only other speaker tha
favored any tinkering with an institu-
ton which, as was said, had been ap-
proved by the history Of thousand
| years.
| Nearly hundred members Of the
ASSOCIATION enjoyed the dinner and the
tact of Judge Oscar Hallam, the toast
master.
| Men Of Experience
| To reach members most familiar
with the workings of the grand jury
system, Judge Hallam called upon for
mer Judge j. w. Willis, of the dis
trict court; County Attorney Kane,
former Assistant County Attorney r.
w. Zollman and Attorney Stan Dom
nelly, the criminal lawyer.
Judges and attorneys agreed that
the grand jury system should be re-
tanned because it is an essential part
1 OF the American judicial system, and,
indirectly, of the American admins
tratlve system; because it is a highly
important guarantee of liberty; and
because it's abolition to any vital ex-
tent would lay the basis for fragrant
injustice, for, government oyercentral-
/ Y.
Incidentally, it was said, the jury sys-
tenn aided and protected both the Judge
! and the public prosecutor and edu-
Gated many citizens as Jurors in the
rights and duties of citizenship AS
for objections, the statement that the
| grand jury was an ancient institution
proved nothing whatever; the asser-
! ton that the jury system was ex-
! pensive was foolish exaggeration
4 Senators Laybourn and Morgan JUS
t1fled a change in the jury system
chiefly by the example of other states
and the plea of economy They urged
j also that the machinery of justice
4 would be expedited. They insisted
] power to call a grand jury would still
! rest with both judges and the citizens.
/ After Judge Hallam had said some
thing of the grand jury's ancient de-
! scent from the assize of Clarendon, Mr..
Zoliman said that the jury had been
founded to protect citizens against the
injustice, the encroachment, and the
wh1ms of government. That the jury
| had been successful in doing this was
/ surely no reason for abolishing it.
Laws were designed to maintain rights
as well as to establish them.
Had the system been means of
/ oppression, some reason might be given
for the proposed change, but the speak
er had as yet heard no valid reason.
1 1t had not been asserted that grand
| 1ur1es were corrupt, that they were
sWayed by malice, or that they attack
ed the liberty of the citizens.
On the contrary, the grand jury had
| aIWayS extended its protecting hand
to the citizen as against the tyrant
Result of Jury System
| 1t might be said, indeed, that now
when governments have become so
mild and reasonable, we no longer
| needed the grand jury. But this favor
| able condition was, in itself, the result
| OF the jury system. The next attack
might be on the petit jury, and grad
| ually the whole attitude of government
might change with the opportunity to
| change.
Judges being human were subject to
bias Neither judge nor prosecuting
attorney should be called upon to de-
eide wholly Of his own volition wheth-
er the life or liberty of citizen should
be jeopardized.
The moral power of the grand jury
should not be overlooked. The peo-
pie were more afraid of jury than OF
single prosecutor; indictments in
spired more respect than information
And whatever institution exercised q
preventive influence against crime
should be preserved Local instances
could be cited where the very meeting
of a grand jury had freed the city from
many forms Of vice.
The transfer Of the jury power and
privilege to a public prosecutor would
create one-man power, to be swayed
perhaps, by many sorts of influences.
Mr.. Zollman had found the grand
jury great. aid while he was in ths
county attorneys Office. The jury
might sometimes have erred, but cer-
tainly no individual would be less LA.
bic to make mistakes. ~tis 49,
Stan Donnelly said that he believed
exactly as did Mr.. Zollman, and wouli
not wish to see the jury systen
changed. 1t was an institution ol1l
ancestors had fought for, one that haG
come down to the present generatio,
j at the price of many great struggle
We hear sometimes" continued
Mr.. Donnelly, severe criticisms Of thu
grand jury because its findings dom
agree with public sentiment. But wha
do the critics know of the testinlon
| that had come before the jury?
Il remember one case in st. Paul. A
man was indicted for murder. TIL,
| testimony showed, however, that tn,
prisoner was dead drunk when h,
committed the crime; that he didn.
know the victim, and hadn't the slight
est intention of killing him. It wa,
, plain slaughter-nothing else. Ye
! 1,0 s,r1o -.