The Bottineau courant. (Bottineau, Bottineau County, N.D.) 1895-1929, 1905-02-17
Communication.
Editor Courant,
Bottineau, N. D.

Editor Courant,
Bottineau, N. D.
Dear Sir:-It is with some hesitation
that I attempt to comment on the
verdict of the juries, for the reason
that men who are sworn as such are
supposed to do their duty as they see
it. All men do not look at evidence
in the same light and yet when we
come to look at the verdicts returned
we are forced to conclude that jury
is lottery from which some men
draw winning card regardless of
their guilt as shown by the evidence.
This believe to have been the
case in the prosecution Of Ethelbelt
Smith charged with handing in a
hack saw to liberate the prisoners con.
fined in the county Jail. That the
man was guilty there does not appear
to be the slightest doubt when we
come to review the evidence as given
in court. Two men swore positively
to seeing him hand in the parcel.
These men in giving their testimony
did not hesitate to incriminate them
selves and therefore it is natural to
suppose that they were telling the
truth. The defendant was in Canada
/ at te time the saws were supposed to
have been purchased and everything
pointed to his guilt. The only de:
fence set up was an attempt to belittle
the evidence of the states witnesses
by impeaching their testimony. The
attorney for the defence asked several
impeaching questions all of which they
denied. He then called several of the
other prisoners and asked them if
they had such conversations with Cut.
ting and Bacon. The answer was in
variably yes but when on cross exam
ination they were asked to repeat the
conversations they were una BILE to
give the exact language that they had
sworn was used by the states witnes-
ses, clearly showing that it was con-
cocted schema on the part of these
prisoners to defeat the ends Of justice.
And yet in the face of all this the YER
dict of the jury was not guilty. he
only excuse that can possibly be offered
for verdict of this kind is the fact
that the states witnesses were in Jail
at the time and therefore their evid-
ence should be considered with eau
tion but this fact does not give .ary
the license to entirely disregard it as
this one did. Under this verdict the
sheriff might as we'll throw open the
Jail doors and allow the prisoners
their liberty, the states attorney might
as we'll extend the glad hand of fell
lowship to the criminal and the dis
trict judge remain in his chambers
and allow crime to run rampant
throughout the county. For the only
way to convict man of this crime is
by the evidence of those confined in
the Jail. The sneak that is guilty of a
crime of this kind is not going to stand
around and wait until the jailer is look
ing at him and then hand in tools.
Furthermore it is natural to suppose
that those who did not aid in the ex-
posure would be vindictive and en-
deavor by every means in their power
to Toll the law. The evidence was
positive as to the mans guilt. The
charge Of the court was clear and to
the point on all questions of law,
nevertheless the verdict of the jury
was not guilty. do not wish to in
sinuate that arguments outside of the
evidence were used to influence the
jurors. I do not suppose any one
would SO far forget his oath as to use
the seriousness Of the crime as an argu-
ment with his fellow jurors to per-
suade them to return verdict of not
guilty but I do believe that the ends
of Justice have been defeated and that
criminals have been given a license to
continue in their career of crime.
Arne Hunsker was found guilty of
assault with dangerous weapon for
shooting in the direction Of a man
that was quarter Of q mile away and
I believe the jury did its duty. The
next jury rendered vote of thanks to
Anton Ronning on the same charge.
They found him guilty of assault and
battery, the most illogical verdict that
it was posi- BILE to bring in for the man
was either guilty of the crime charged
or else he was SO drunk that he did
not know what he was doing and
therefore was not guilty of any crime.
and under our law voluntary intoxi
! cation is no defence for crime. The
last jury capped the climax by putting
a premium on crime and making it
impossible for the officers to convict a
man of attempting to. liberate prison
ers. Thus the mill Of justice grinds
out it's various grists.
r.. A. Parker