The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1918-09-14

was to convict the accused in the most
summary manner without a trial by
jury. And hence, the crime was NAM
ed contempt. Under similar statute
giving the same name to any other
crime, persons might be accused and
convicted of any crime, such as the
contempt of robbery, or the contempt
of murder.
In this case we should try to form a
clear conception OF the distinction be-
tween a trial for a crime and sum-
mary contempt procedure. A crime
or public offense. is an act which the
law forbids and Furnishes with death,
imprisonment or fine. &C. Z. Sec.
1G2S5C. A. crime is an Offense against
the state and the state alone may
punish or condone it; a contempt Of
court-so far as it is not d crime--is
an offense against the court or judge
and he alone may punish or condone
it. A crime is punishable according
to the law of the land; a. contempt
so far as not crime-ispunishable
only according to the will OF the con-
temned judge. The same act. as the
beating of a Judge, may constitute
both crime and contempt: In such
case. the Judge may condone the
personal offense, or punish it summar-
lily by fine and Imprisonment. And
in accordance with the law of the land,
the state may prosecute and punish
the. criminal offense. The summary
punishment by an offended judge Is
merely personal affair between him
and the offender. It is not strictly a
legal proceeding. 1t does never con-
vict the offender of crime or brand
him as criminal.
BY statute in certain specified cases,
q contempt of court is made mis-
demeanor. tSec. 9419). And in such
cases court of record may summar.
lily punish the contempt by fine not
exceeding $3.50 or by Imprisonment
not exceeding thirty days or both.
(sections. S178, $780, The statute
fixes definite limit on any sum-
mary punishment-It says to the
court. Thus far mayst thou 60 and
no farther. But when the state COM
mences prosecution to involve and
call down the penalties of the law,
then its procedure must conform to
the law and the constitutions; then
the accused must have a trial by
Jury and he cannot waive It, He can
not even by express consent gFe thu
Judge jurisdiction TO try the case.
When a prosecution is for a crime,
then it is no summary matter, then
It is not word and blow. then there
must be q strict observance of those
sacred guarantees Of the constitution,
NSec..a7. The right Of trial by jury
shall be secure to all and shall re.
main inviolate.
Sec. s. All offenses shall be prose
cuted criminally by indictment or by
information. ,s-.-. ~
Sec, Is. No person shall be com.
PEELED in any criminal case, to be a
witness against himself.
We,need not argue to prove that the
right Of trial by jury should forever
be held sacred. Arbitrary power may
not safely be given to any man. It
makes him tryant and despOt; it
ruins the character of Judge. AS
Blackstone has written-In settling
and adjusting questions Of fact. when
entrusted to a single magistrate, par
TALLY and injustice have ample field
to range In; either by boldly assert
Ing to be true that which is not SO,
or by more artfully tsuppressing some
circumstances, stretching and warp
in gothers, and distinguishing away
the remainder.
) In the early days, one Markuson
was summarily convicted Of, the crime
ofscontempt and sentenced to the PEN
itentiary for two years. The convic.
ton was sustained by a specious and
polite decision. 6 N. D. 100. And
now In Stand Pat way, without de-