Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1917-06-29
LANCER HAD NO
RIGHT TO TAKE
PHONE 'CHANCE
So Declares Minot Judge,
Who Bitterly Scores
Langer's Aides.
Palda Released on Habeas
Corpus-Men Committed
Felony, Court Holds.

Minot, N. D., June 2s.-That the
only persons committing an offense
during the incidents at the telephone
Office the night of the raid in Minot,
May z. were those who went there
and unlawfully took possession of the
place. is the finding of Judge K. E.
Leighton of the district court in his
decision in the habeas corpus action
of Attorney L. j. Palda, which was
filed at the office Of the clerk Of the
district court Wednesday.
As was stated in the press at the
time Of the raid,- Attorney General
OF citizens in the capacity Of deputy
sherifs. Three of the deputies, Grant
8. Youmans, A. Upton and F. c. Up
ton accompanied LANCER to the tele-
phone office and seized the exchange,
} ordering the girls to leave the switch
boards. Manager Mcguire Of the
telephone company went to the office
to ascertain the of the break in
the service. He was met by LANCER
and his assistants.
Mcclure left the building and Sc.
cured the company of Attorney L. J.
Palda, attorney for the telephone
company, and other citizens. They
proceeded to the telephone office and
I . 00AAA0llOCu lldI LILO U6puLlS
show their authority for their actions
No process Of law, legalizing the seiz-
ure, had been gone through and Pal
da went to the switchboard hoping to
be able to make a connection with
Judge Leighton's residence and find
out II the judge had given the depu.
ties authority. He was ordered back
from the board by A. Upton. Guns
were drawn and as a result Palda was
arrested for threatening to shoot A
Upton.
At the preliminary hearing before
Justice A. B. Dill. Palda was bound
over to tho district court. Attorney
Dudley Nash, acting for the accused
Immediately made application fol
habeas corpus. claiming the evidence
was insufficient to warrant Palda',
committal to the higher court. The
decision. Of Judge Leighton filed at the
district court ONCE grants the wri,
and discharges Palda, the defendant
Officers Disrcgarded Law.
In part the Judgment handed GU,
by Judge Leighton says:
There can be no question that tht
mere fact that a man may be an Of
ficer. does no give him any right.
over and above the rights Of a privat,
citizen, unless he has process from
some court. The fact that he 10 {
deputy sheriff, attorney general. gov
ernor. or Judge Of the supreme court
would give him no more authority Il
nee than any other private either
would have.
The deputy has no more authorit,
than an individual. except that he Il
authorized in certain cases to sery,
process and make arrests, but he ha.
no more authority to make arrest,
without q warrant than a private cit
izen.
1T is clear. then, that these parties
who went there and took charge o,
the telephone Office. were trespassers
and the company had the right Il
treat them as trespassers. The man.
ager or any Of his assistants or agent
had the right to remove them from
the premises. provided that in 50 do
ing they used no more force than wa
necessary to remove them from tn,
premises. These parties. being tres
passers. would be in no better posi-
ton than II they had entered q prt
vate dwelling house and took posses
sion thereof without process, ana n,
one contends that the owner of {
dwelling house. in such . case, woult
N~ A~S pV"0A anu d0tklOE1Iy u
eject him from the premises.
There IL also another question. GU,
statute provides:
Section 1921: That every perso,
who prevents, obstructs or delays b,
any unauthorized means or contrtv
ance whatever, the sending, convey
ance. Transmission or delivery in thi
state Of any such communication O
message by telegraph or telephone
or aids, employees, agrees or conspire
With any other person to do any 6
such acts or things, 10 guilty OF /,
felony
1T 10 apparent from the testimon,
that these parties who went there ant
took possession Of such telephone
without any authority, were engage,
In the commission Of . felony; an
any one has the right tQ.use force Il
prevent any one from Committing !,
felony in their presence; 20 that OF
two grounds. the telephone compan,
had the right to use force, ana II,
only r~sstFictton u that which 10 gfyel
by statute; that Il! that no more fore,
shall b ussd than y necessary.
Unaso1sstssd " ConsatudOn.
II needs no argument 10 conytnc,
/ 0yon the lAY Wl10 that ttaia 1aadxsar,