The Somerset reporter., 1908-01-09
Prosecution or Persecution-Which2


The search and seizure made by the
Sturgis deputies at Bucknam's drug
store last October, has now become
of more than local interest, by reason
of the attempt to secure Fan indict-
ment before the grand jury at the
term of Court now in session, and its
final disposition by The failure of that
body to return bill, calls for more
than passing mention.
1t will be recalled that the RE
PORTER commented on the affair at
the time the seizure was made, tax
ing the position that, as the search re-
vealed nothing but what might be
found in any drug store, and no more
of a stock of liquor than any FIRST
class druggist, doing a legitimate
drug business of considerable pro-
portions, would find it necessary to
carry, the move was regretable from
every point of view Our comment
embraced the assertion that, with one
or more deputies having their head
quarters here, it should have been
possible to determine the condition
more accurately without subjecting
the proprietor of a thoroughly rep
utable establishment to the indignity
of search of his place of business
and the subsequent legal proceedings
resulting therefrom.
Much Indignation has been express
ed concerning this affair and, SO far
there exists among the business men
of the town and those who are most
conversant with the business done at
Bucknam's drug store, but one SEN
timent with regard to it. A feeling
OF surprise is expressed that the pro-
ceedings were not Immediately dis
continued when the flimsy character
of the evidence upon which they
were based came to the knowledge
of the Sturgis Commission. That
they should have pushed the matter
TO the extent that they did, when so
little grounds existed for their action
and when they had SO little reason to
expect the grand jury would return
an indictment, made a farce of the
course of Justice and created situa-
ton which would have been, but for
the wrong done, highly amusing. 1t
may be noted that Alfred IL. Lang of
this place, in an interview since the
grand jury arose, disclaims having
had any personal interest in the
Bucknam case. While the search
was made by the deputies, it is gem
orally believed that they do not act
in an important matter of this kind
except at his bidding, and it is not con-
ceivable that, after the result of the
search was made known, the case
would have been prosecuted other
than by his direction. The motive for
the matter is hard to find unless, as
many of our people believe, it was
based on some personal or political
grounds. With all due respect to Mr..
Lang and his record as citizen OF
this community and county official,
it may be said that the whole affair
fails TO exhibit the liability and judg-
ment usually accredited to him.
We do not look for the same error
to be repeated. In fact, the usual
result, which is certainly among the
things to be regretted, is that a mis-
take of this nature reacts against the
Commission in such a manner that
they are very much limited in their
ability to apprehend real violators OF
the law by reason of it. We can but
believe that the Commission now
realize the unwarranted nature of the
course they pursued in this particular
instance and that they will be gov
erned by greater caution and better
judgment in similar instances in the
future.