The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-05-19
COOLEY WILL
NOT CALL A
GRAND JURY

Grand Forks, N. D., May 49,
Judge c. M. Cooley Of the district
court yesterday afternoon refused to
call grand jury, as requested by O.
B. Burtness, states attorney, for the
investigation Of the charges of alleg-
ed bribery in connection with the Nc
Lain Cooper murder trial.
Up to the People Themselves.
The reasons of the judge for refus-
ing to call the grand jury are con-
tanned in a letter sent to Mr.. Burt
ness, in which Judge Cooley denounc-
ed J. A. Sullivan, chief witness for the
state, as a perjuror.
Judge Cooley states that, in his
opinion, he has no right to summon
a grand jury for this purpose, unless
asked tQado- so by a petition signed
by 10 per cent of the voters of the
county, or has reason to believe that
the calling Of such a jury is necessary
for the enforcement of the laws of the
state.
No Necessity for Jury.
There is no such necessity at the
present time, in the opinion of the
judge.
Taking up the evidence given by
Andy Sullivan and w. H. BradfieId,
stenographer for the Pinkerton de-
tective agency in the preliminary
hearing Of Tracy Bangs and James
Mahon, Judge Cooley states that he
knows Sullivan to have perjured HIM
self in some Of his evidence, and be-
lieVes that his story was absolutely
false. The testimony of Bradffeld is
also branded as untrustworthy.
Out and Out Perjury.
Sullivans testimony to the effect
that he Gudge Cooley) had given him
(Sullivan) SIS. is declared an abso-
lutte perjury.
Judge Cooley's letter follows:
May IS, 1914.
Hon o. B. Burtness. States Attor-
ney. Grand Forks. North Dakota. Dear
Sir:
Referring to your letter of the 18th
inst, wherein it is suggested that a
grand jury be called for the June, 1914,
term of the district court.
The suggestion coming from one Of
the law offices of the county, I have
given the matter careful considera-
tion, and, in view of your written re-
quest. have concluded to recount in
my reply few cogent reasons NOV
ing me in my decision not to call such
grand jury on the suggestion.
A reading Of section 9798 of the
1905 revised codes makes it plain
that the policy of the law is decidedly
against the calling of grand jury
that section providing that. "No grand
jury shall be drawn, or summoned to
attend at any session of the district
court" except under certain condi-
tions. One Of the conditions and the
only one under which the judge has
the authority to call a grand jury on
his own initiative (Which it would be,
for me to act on your suggestion) is
when the Judge Of any district court
-" shall deem the attend
ance OF such grand jury necessary for
the due enforcement Of the laws of
the state"
Prior to 1905, the judge of the dis
trict court was required to call
grand jury upon the petition of twen-
ty-five resident free holders Or tax
payers of the county, but the legisla-
ture. by chapter 126 OF the session
laws Of 1905. so amended the law in
that respect as to require 10 per cent
of the total male votes cast for gov
ernor at the last general election in
said county.
call your attention to this amend
lnent as a persuasive reason for my
Interpretation of the statute. viz: that
1t prohibits the imposition of the ex-
tense of grand jury upon the people
CT the county, unless the district judge
can judicially determine that it is nec-t
essary for the due enforcement Of the
laws or the financial agents Of the
county request it in writing or very
considerable per cent of the male vot-
ers. to-wit:- 10 per cent, petition for it.
You can thus appreciate that before
could Justify myself in acting on my
own Initiative in the calling OF grand
jury, 1t would be incumbent on me to
satisfy myself Of the necessity there
for.
While in your letter there is gem
eral reference to "all other matters
that may properly come before that
body, it iG apparent that your sug-
gestion is based on the bribery charg-
es therein referred to. not only from
what is said. but because. E1) there is
no mention of any other cause in your
written communication; (2) you have
never mentioned to me any other
cause, and (3) no other cause has been
suggested to my mind in any way.
have, therefore, in my investiga-
tioris to deternine whether am justi-
fed in calling grand jury, given spe-
Continued on Page Five.