Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1907-05-25
ANTOINE BEERS, ONE or THE
STATES STAR WITNESSES, Y
BEFORE GRAND JURY
REFUSES TO TESTIFY LEST HE
4 INC RiNdIFiATE HIMsELF-coURT
SAYS HE MUST ANSWER
DEFENSE WILL DUPLICATE THE
COURSE OF PROSECUTION AND
CARRY CASE HIGHER
OTHER LIQUOR VIOLATIONS MAY
COME BEFORE JURY-GRAY'
LIBEL CASE


The grand jury made Its. regular
afternoon visit to Judge Winchester's
court yesterday. It's course seems to
be rough and rocky, and it came to /
the fountain head Of legal wisdom for
further direction on its stormy way.
From the questions asked it app
peared that Antoine Beers, one OF the
states star witnesses IN the 3. O..
Patterson cases., had been testifying
In a certain case and incidentally
mentioned unlawful transactions in
other places. The Jurors wanted to
know whether they had the right to
take up that scent and follow the
course of derelictions through the
devious pathways which seemed to
open up before them. or whether they
should stick to one case at time.
Mixing Things.
The states attorney argued that 1t
would be more orderly to take one
case at time. The court said:
while the method suggested by
the states attorney might be the most
orderly way OF proceeding. vet at the
same time the court is Of the opinion
that the grand jurors have the right
to ask any questions Of any witness
at any stage sof the proceeding, and
IL the grand jurors find that there
have been other violations of any
laws they have the right to send for
witnesses and thoroughly investigate
such cases, Z
Harmonious Action Advised.
The grand jurors were informed
that they were masters Of the situa-
ton and could elect their own method
Of procedure. In questioning wit.
nesses it is their option to allow the
states attorney to ask the questions,
or they might ask the states attor-
ney to step outside whenever they SO
desired. The court, however, sug-
gested that the better plan was for
the grand jury to work in harmony
with the states attorney in all mar
tiers.
Feared discriminating Himself.
The court was asked to what pro-
Icedure was proper in case a witness,
abiding to Beers, who was brought;
before them refused to answer any
questions on the ground that the
answers might tend to incriminate'
him.
! The court, basing its ruling on the
statute, advised the grand jury that
If the witness was not himself
charged with any crime he would be
obliged to, answer the questions put to-
him, and II he refused he would be
guilty Of contempt Of court.
May Get TO Supreme Court. II
Mr.. Townsend was present in the
court room and at this stage advised
the court that he apprehended that
Witness Beers who had refused to-
answer had probably consulted him
before hand, and that In behalf Of his
client he resisted the order Of the
Iscourt for the purpose OF testing the
constitutionality Of the law upon
which the ruling was based. He
asked that no coercion Be used in the
case Of this witness. but that some
amicable arrangement might be made
Las was done In the case Of the ques-
ton that arose as to whether Judge
Corliss was entitled to access to the
grand jury room, and stated he would
Immediately take the matter up to
the higher court Here the matter
rests until morning.
1 The question also arose as to the
presence Of the states attorney in the
grand jury room when the jurors
voted on any matter before them.
They were informed that they were
entitled to shut out the states attor-
[ney whenever q vote was taken ON
any matter. The jury then returned
70 Its labors.
The Gray Libel Case.
n district court the case Of the
State Of North Dakota against 8. II.
Gray was called, Judge Kneeshaw, 81
Pembina. presiding. George Gibson
of McCnIloch B Gibson, Washburn
conducted the examination Of the
Jurors for the defendant, and B. g
skulason OF Grand Forks, examined
Jurors for the state.
Rev. s. II. Gray, the defendant. was
at ono time CONGREGATIONAL min
lister He sat close TO the elbows d
n his counsel and took d lively Interest