The Bemidji daily pioneer. [volume] (Bemidji, Minn.) 1904-1971, 1909-09-30
JUDGE WRIGHT ANNULLED
INDICTMENTS THIS A. NJ.
Attorney General Stated Indictments Had Been Returned
Despite His Dsapproval- Attorney Not
Involved In Any Way.

made public at that time. and the
| additional publicity of this fact been
given such wide circulation as was
the fact of the indebtedness of the
county.
In conclusion,' said Mr.. Simp-
son, lin my opinion convictions
cannot be secured for the crimes
alleged and if there were, would not
result in any public good, and I am
certain that in some instances it
would have been utterly impossible
to secure convictions.
In fact, those Indictments were
returned over the protest of Assist
ant Attorney General Smith, who
was with the grand jury at that
time, and also over my protest"
Judge Wright asked for the
opinion of County Attorney Nc
Kusick in that matter.
Mr.. McKusick tated that Attor-
ney General Simpson had correctly
stated the facts in connection with
the indictments; that he had had
nothing to no with the indictments
from beginning to end; that Assist
ant Attorney General Smith was
waiting on the grand jury at the
time the indictments were returned
and that he (McKusick) did not
draw the indictments.
Mr.. McKusick stated that he did
not believe that a conviction was
possible, and that all of his acts in
connection with the indictments had
been under the direction of Attorney
General Simpson. ..y-~ i
Judge Wright stated that he was
not advised as to the facts which had
been presented to the grand jury
concerning these indictments. That
while the crime may have been
committed, the crime was not more
than a technical one and was CON-
mitted without any hope of gain to
the indicted parties, or loss to the
county.
The county auditors failure to
keep books which were not furnish
ed by the county was a trivial
affair.
Judge Wright stated that he want
ed to 60 still stronger than the at
torney general and say that he
believed that the matter of itemizing
bills was also a technical omission
and shauld not have been treated so
seriously.
Mr.. Simpson stated to the court
that there was another Indictment
which had been returned at the same
time that the indictments previously
mentioned had been returned to
which he wished to call the atten-
ton of the court. If the facts, as
alleged in that indictment, were true,
they might constitute a crime, said
Mr.. Simpson.
Owing to the notoriety given to
this indictment by people who
claimed to know the nature thereof,
he thought that the party against
whom this indictment was returned
should be given an opportunity to
explain and show whether the alleged
facts were true or not and clear away
the doubts given by the return of
the indictment.
Mr.. Simpson then called for the
arraignment of Yves Wright, who
appeared and through his attorney
pro tenn, Henry Funkley, asked that
the matter be laid over until to-
morrow morning, when Mr.. Russell,
counsel for Mr.. Wright, would be
present.
The indictment against Mr..
Wright alleges that he, as county
commissioner, was interested in a
road contract entered into between
the county of Beltrami and John w.
Olson.
>. The indictments which were
annulled and the one on which Mr..
Wright was arraigned are the same
which were given publicly in St.
; Paul through information advanced
by M. F. Kain, deputy public exam.
liner, who testified before the grand
| jury, and which were not made pub
lie before today and the contents
were supposed to be unknown tc
anyone. = -."-. -
Il The public examiners Office ha:
- ~ a- d,