Bismarck daily tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, Dakota [N.D.]) 1881-1916, 1909-12-01

be amended to include the attorney
general. While the statute with ref
ference to the grand jury stated that
the states attorney was the only OFF,
cial who could be present aside from
the witnesses, the attorney general
held that subsequent statutes had by
Inference and implication enlarged
this statute to include the attorney
general. The attorney general was
given the right under the law to lin
stitute prosecutions, and this includ-
cd appearance before the grand jury.
States Attorney Stevens took the
opposite view. He said that the
states attorney did not institute pros
ecutions or actions fore the grand
jury. That was a matter for the
grand jury alone. The states attorney
acted merely as adviser Of the grand
jury. The only section of the law
that no thought contemplated the
presence of any other prosecutor was
in case of the negligence or failure
of the states attorney to do his duty.
He asked the attorney general to
make a showing of that sort in this
case if it could be done. Otherwise,
he felt inclined to resent the attempt
to come in before the grand jury
over his head, particularly when he
had been served with no complaints,
nor been informed BY the attorney
general of any matters that were to
come before the grand jury or should
come there.
Attorney General Miller slater that
he did not want to convey the i'm
preston that the states attorney had
not done or would not do his duty.
He said he was satisfied the states
attorneys office had been well con-
Quoted, but this question of his right
to go before any grand jury had been
raised in several instances and he
wanted the matter Of his rights set
tied. He said he had no doubt but
it was right to 60 before any grand
jury or to supplant any states attor-
ney in the prosecution of cases If he
felt that circumstances warranted it.
Judge Winchester said similar
question had come up several years
ago. when Judge Corliss, as a special
prosecutor had gone before the grand
had been arrested for contempt OF
court. In that case the attorneys
for the state and the special prose-
cutor had been certain Of his right
to go before the grand jury, but the
supreme court had held otherwise.
In this case he would hold that the
attorney general, under the showing
made, could not 60 before the grand
jury.
The attorney general then request
cd that copy of the court order be
prepared and certified in order that
he might get the matter before the
supreme court at once. A writ Of
mandamus or certiorari will probably
bring the matter to the attention of
the supreme court today.
Prior to the question, the members
of the grand jury were charged by
the court. M. Wolf was named as
foreman. Notwithstanding the fact
that only two or three days was CIV
en- for the summons Of the grand
jury, all of the members of the panel
were in court at q o'clock but two,
Grant Hubbell, who has moved out
of the county, and Lash, who was not
10 be found.
Three talesmen were summoned by
Sheriff McGillis. G. M. Dahl was sum-
but was excused on account
of illness. The other talesmen sum-
moned were Howard Thomas, George
Bolter and Carl w. Anderson,
The members of the grand jury held
a brief session In the afternoon and
adjourned about half past three. They
will resume their labors this morn
ing.
A stay of sixty days was granted
by the court in the case of Slattery
VS.. Rhud.
The civil damage case of Becker vs.
the Bismarck Grocery company, was
then called for trial and jury i'm
paneled. This is an action for the
alleged wrongful conversion of prop
erty.