Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1918-02-06
HARD To SURF.

AHeEHy, KNOWN - the brewery cases, are difficult. to
satisfy. They wanted publicity. They. got publicity.
And now they declare on their solemn Alfred Davids
that publicity has spilled the beans. dumped the fat into
the fire, upset the kettle, and SO corrupted and pervert-
Cd tho minds of the thirty or forty thousand people in
Grand. Forks county that there arc not to be found in the
entire county twelve good men and true who are capable
OF Weighing impartially the evidence in The next OF their
long string Of cases ana rendering a just verdict thereon,
According to the sworn statements, the responsible
iy for this d%splorable condition seems to be shared by
the Honorable Charles F. Amidon, federal judge Of the
district Of North Dakota, the Honorable Charles M.
Cooley and The Grand Forks Herald. ~
With reference to the distinguished jurists Aforesaid,
The Herald has nothing to say. We take it for granted
that IL they deem it fitting to express themsslve. they
will do no. In tho matter Of newspaper publicity, The
Herald is naturally an interested party.
When the historAc-not to say hysteric-raid on the
East Grand Forks brewery was made, the raiders did
not, 80 far as we are informed, bring along q band. or a
regiment Of soldiers. There is no record, either, OF there
being brought a pack Of bloodhounds. or 4 group Of Bsr-
tillon experts. or . moving picture outfit with them.
These omissions were doubtless excusable under the cir
cumstances. 1t takes time to learn, and one cannot re-
member everything. 4@
But the raiders did the best they knew. They
brought along their own press agent. They staged their
A~hs0"s AVuAy0 " UvCH 20
its thrilling quality, and there IL evidence that the en.,re
proceedings were pervaded with the spirit that give. to
the "Dead-Eye Dick" school OF literature 20 much Of is
attracttveness. The inference, and q most natural one.
was that there wis An aching for publicity and the de-
termination to got It II 1t took 4 leg. %
The Herald Wa not an invited party, and II had no
desire to interfere in tho efforts At advertising which had
been so auspiciously started. 1t has not i~nterfered. It
has confined its modest efforts to giving to this case the
publicity which the public interest in it warranted, with.
publicity efforts that were 80 industriously put forth in
one particular direction. It published the facts Of the
raid. It published quite full accounts Of the hearings in
two trials which hayee been held in this city. 1t recorded
the verdict Of acquittal in each case. just as it would
have recorded any other decision that had been reached,
and interesting fact that tho cases had thus far cost the
taxpayers Of Grand Forks county sorns $4,000.
The Herald did e~ditorally redicule the methods Of
the prosecution in the conduct Of their raid. It ridiculsd
those methods for the excellent reason that the methods
were ridicalouA While II Is impossible to do the subject
justice, II was felt that a little ridicule would be entirely
proper. But in its statsrnents Of fact, and especially in
it's reports Of tho trialA The Herald has confined ttself
to impartial and uncolored reports Of the testimony. the
arguments Of counsel and the remarks Of the judge,
Never either directly or BY Implication, has The Herald
expressed Or sought to create an opinion a to the ru,lt
or innocsncs Of the accused.
The course that has bssn followed in this cas, is
that which IL followed In all other cases by this pap>r.
That oourss VIII be followed in the future.
@ s
Dr.. cGaEfisd ~ that W. Il drastic. Dr.. Garfield.