The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1917-11-23
JUDGE DECLINES
To ISSUE ORDER
). FOR GRAND Jury
Nuessle States Legal Reason for
Refusal Failure as to the
Time Of Service.
PETITIONERS SHORT DAY
IN PRESENTING DOCUMENT
No Facts Have Been Stated to
Judge Calling for Special
Jury, He Asserts.
FILES PETITION

Whether an appeal will be taken
10 not known at this time.
In answer to a petition presented to
Judge w. l.. Nuessle on the 10Th inst,
signed by H. A. Thompson, Clinton c.
Sweet, AnthOn Beer and 307 others, a
letter was last evening dispatched to
the gentlemen above mentioned, and
through them to the other petitioners,
in which the court refuses to summon
grand jury for the December term
OF district court, as requested.
There are various reasons for this
action in refusing the petitioners re.
quest, fully set out and explained in
the letter below, addressed in this in
stance, to Anthon Beer. The letter is
as follows:
Z, ~, Judge Nuessle's Letter. w.
.Eh.p-Jn III, Bismarck, N. d.
4 = ,.5 = Nov 20, 1917.
Mr.. H. A. Thompson,
Mr.. Clinton C. SWEET,
Mr.. Anthon Beer,
Bismarck, N. D.
Gentlemen: ...,..
On the 10Th inst, about 4 o'clock
in the afternoon, you presented to me
petitions purporting to be signed by
something over 300 signers, request
ing that grand jury be drawn to
attend the December 1917, term OF
the district court in and for Burleigh
county, North Dakota.
At the time that you presented this
petition stated to you that l was not
inclined to order such a jury unless
such action was absolutely obligatory
upon me under the law. have care
fully gone over your petitions, and,
after consideration, have decided to
refuse to call the jury as prayed.
believe it is only fair to you, gen.
tlemen, and to the other signers Of
the petition, that set out shortly my
reasons for taking this position.
The legal reason that | assign Is
that the petitions were not presented
in due time. Under the statute the
term convenes on Dec. 4. The law,
section 1O635, Compiled Laws of 1913,
relative to the calling of grand jury,
requires that such petitions must be
presented to the judge at least Is
days before the commence ement Of the
term at which the attendance OF a
grand jury is requested. AS con-
strue it, this petition was presented
on the fifteenth day before the COM
mencement of such term, and the last
day in which the same could be prop
erly presented was Nov. IS. am will.
ing to concede that this is technical
objection on my part, and one that
could easily be overlooked should the
occasion require, but l am impelled
to take this stand by reason OF the
following, which l consider real and
substantial reasons:
In the first place, the calling OF a
grand jury imposes upon the county
very large additional expense, and
in times such as we now have, every
item of expense should be carefully
scrutinized.
In the second place, the petition Is
presented at so late date that there
would be great difficulty in getting a
proper grand jury, and having the
same in working order in time to at
tend to such business as might arise
at the term, and by reason thereof the
business of the term would be great.
ly hindered and delayed.
In the third place, no facts have
been stated to me which could cause
me or anyone to believe that grand
Jury is necessary at this time. There
has been no charge made that any
criminal matters requiring investiga-
ton have not been investigated. There
has been nothing said to cause me to
believe that either the states attor'
ney or the attorney general have
failed, refused or neglected in any
manner to perform fully and carefully
any and all duties that they might
properly be expected to perform. On
the other hand, know from my own
knowledge and observation that the
attorney general of North Dakota, and
the states attorney of Burleigh coun-
ty, and each of them, are not only
honest. conscientious and capable In
discharging the duties of their respec'
tive offices, but also Jealous IN see
ing that all malefactors are brought
to justice.
In this state we have the system
of prosecution by information, which
believe nearly all authorities con-
cede is much more speedy and etfi-
cient than the grand jury system. AS
a result of my observation heretofore
l have come to the conclusion that a
grand jury is ordinarily called for one
or more of the following reasons:
First. Where the states attorney
of any county is either dishonest IN
competent or negligent in the per-
Torrance Of his duties, and thereby
(continued ou Page Txo.l