Decorah public opinion. (Decorah, Winneshiek County [Iowa]) 1895-1928, 1911-12-06
ALAS! ALAS! MASON CITY.
Trouble Follows Trouble i'm Our
SOrely Beridden Sister City
of Northern Iowa.

Algona Courier: The dignity and
majesty of the law were grossly trifl-
ed with in Mason City last week.
Indeed Mason City has an unenvi-
able reputation for disregard of law
in all its phases, but this last is the
most fragrant and contemptuous act
on the part of Mason Citizens that
We have yet heard of. How the vio-
lators should be appropriately pun
ished is not clear to us.
A short synopsis of the case may
be stated thus: A resident of that
notorious town was last week hailed
before the court, presided over by
Judge Joseph j. Clark, on the charge
of selling liquor in violation of the
law made and provided governing
the sale of that much mathematical
and much sought article of COM
merce. The trial was elaborate and
exhaustive, and among other feat
ures and evidences of the guilt of
the accused was Exhibit A." which
was a quart bottle of whiskey and
a quart bottle of beer. These two
bottles of liquids were found in the
possession of the accused or were
sold by him, and were the CHIEF evil
dences of his guilt.
When the case was submitted to
the jury, twelve good and true men,
Exhibit A" was turned over TO them
that they might satisfy themselves
that the liquids were really what
they were charged to be. The Jurors,
it seems, knew no other way to con-
vince themselves of that fact than
by sampling the goods. They SAM
pied and they discussed, and they
discussed and they sampled, and
after being out two days they re-
ported disagreement and were dis
charged Exhibit A" was needed
for use in the retrial OF the case, but
when the bottles were returned to
the sheriff it was readily seen that
they contained water insteac of beer
and whiskey. Every drop of the
liquors had been consumed by the
jurors in their endeavor to arrive at
a verdict.
Judge Clark was surprised and in
dignant. He sent for the baliff who
had the jury in charge, an old and
faithful hanger-on of the court, and
discharged him peremptorily and
perpetually, and it is said that he
is seriously considering what he may
do or can do with those jurors. A
trial for the punishment of the jur-
ors would be a very interesting and
instructive proceeding. The jurors
would, no doubt, plead that the
liquor consumed by them was none
too much for a discussion covering
two DAYS and one night, and that if
the Judge did not intend that they
should convince themselves of it's
character by sampling it he should
not have submitted it to them. And
the counsel for the jurors might
charge the Judge himself with some
blame in the case. He might charge
that the judge erred in putting such
a temptation before his fe:Iow men.
The jurors were in way command
ed by the court to smell and caste
those liquors and convince them
selves that they were really and in
fact whiskey and beer, and the court
did not restrict the jurors in The
smelling and tasting. 1t is not at
all improbable that jury Or a
higher court might find that the
judge erred.
And as to the discharged ba;liff.
the poor fellow might have been en-
tirely innocent and merely victim
of the judges chagrin. II was not
for him to interfere with the DELHI
erations of the jury lest he lay him
self liable for contempt OF court or
for jury fixing or bribing. The case
admits of many views and theories,
and it's proper adjudication would be
an important contribution to legal
lore, moral ethics and metaphysical
science. 1t is hoped that In some
way the anger of the cour; may be
appeased and the dignity of the law
upheld.