Golden Valley chronicle. (Beach, Billings County, N.D.) 1905-1916, 1914-04-17
oste!rman g! Held
To Dist. Court
No Evidence Introduced to Show
Man. Cuilt.-Maek Jones Ad-
uits Interfering With Voter
and Using Profane Language
In Polling Place.

years, was the defendant and
Mark Jones the complaining wit
ness. Osterman was arrested and
prevented from voting by Mark
Jones. who was very active about
the polling place all day election.
Jones was the principal witness
for the state and testified that he
had seen Osterman working last
summer on Waldron's farm near
Carlyle. and this was all the evil
.dence against the man that the
state had to offer. Another state
witness, Chas. Darlington, who
was employed to stay at the vot-
ing place to challenge voters, tes-
tilted that he had seen Osterman
in Beach over a year ago. and,
like Jones, he also heard Oster-
man say that he did work in
Montana and have some clothes
there.
Jones admitted on the stand
that he had interferred with the
voter and had used profane Ian
guage in speaking to him, and
Darlington testified that Jones
was within four or FIVE feet of
the election officers table in COM
mitting the crime. But to date
Jones has not been arrested, evil
dently, on account of his close
friendship to States Attorney
Halliday and the peace officers.
And then, too. Jones was and is
an anti-Brinton man and silk
stocking fellow. while Osterman
is a laboring man, wears overalls
and rockford sox. There's all the
difference in the world. That
seems to be Osterman's greatest
crime-being Brinton voter, a
laboring man and wearing over
alls.
When States Attorney Halli-
day addressed the justice he
argued that the burden of proof
was upon the defendant, or in
other words that the defendant
had to prove his innocence, and
this was very clever move on
the part of the state attorney as
he had no evidence to prove the
mans guilt.
As there was no evidence
against him. Qsterman, through
his attorney. declined to offer
any and refused to attempt a
proof of his innocence, when the
law of the land places the bur-
den Of proof on the state. to
prove that the accused is guilty.
Justice Heath. however, took It
for granted that the defendant
was guilty and bound him over
to the district court and plac ed
his bond at 5000. Being that he
case was approved by the state 8
attorney it becomes a county case
and the costs will be paid by the
taxpayers.
From the evidence submitted
it appears that if any crime wa.
committed, it was committed by
Mark Jones and not by Mr.. Os-
terman. as Jones was not an elec-
ton official and yet he admitted
that he interferred with the voted
used profane language in the
polling place and cross question.
ed the voter with profanity while
he was seeking to use his rish,
of voting. Jones. by his own
testimony. admitted that he com.
mitted two crimes, and it is he
that should have been arrested
instead of Mr.. Osterman, who i.
a bona 6de voter in the city oi
Beach and who was prevented
from voting by the illegal acts oi
a campaigner and bystander on
election day.
Mr.. Waldron, for whom Mr.
Osterman worked, was sub.
poenaed as a state witnes, bu,
when the states attorney learn.
e9 that Mr.. Waldron' testimon,
was such that 1t would show o.
te,man's right to vote, he was no
celled to testify. Facts brought
o:'t at the nearing: also showed
that Mr.. Osterman was illegal,
arrested and that in putting hin
u'.cer arrest til: state constitution
was violated. 1t was also brough
cut that the for?. of AFFIDAVIT
p.;r ted by III. Beach Advance
ard used by the election eff
ssklssxip sse.stna Unregistered
vtters, was not in legal form anc
placed hardship on many o.
those who were not registered
This will all come out in the tria