Grand Forks herald. [volume] (Grand Forks, N.D.) 1916-1955, 1920-07-28
At peclskon.

ag4s -
The decision In part follows:
The grounds on which the motion
TOR new trial L. apparently based,
ana which the couFtn in Its ruling
takes into consideration are:
y. Because the verdict is not justi-
ned by the evtdence.
"Because Of errors in law occur
the defendants at the time.
Because the verdict Is contrary. to
Because Of errors OF law occurring
at the trial and hereby expected to
and stated.
After a fun and careful constdera-
tion of all matters before the court,
1t is ordered that the motion Of de-
PENDANTS for a new trial be denied"
In his memorandum, Judge Dean,
in part says:
Considering the motion for new
trial. the court has been obliged to
do so without the aid Of counsel in
presenting brief or citing law au-
thorities on the questions raised, and
without argument of counsel, either
oral. or written nor has the case been
presented in the usual or customary
way
by counsel for defendants on certain
court before the care should be con-
sidered submitted. More than ample
time has been allowed the defend
ants attorneys to prepare and submit
their brief and written argument but
none has been received. therefore II
has been deemed best to treat the
case at this time as fully admitted
and decide. the case at this time
without further waiting. 81
The records contain 1,1s6 pages OF
+ typewritten and printed matters and
numerous exhibits, and some tim.
has been required to go over the rec
ord and consider the many assign
arguments and briefs which were ia
have been made by defendants conn.
particular attention is called /,
the assignment OF error No. 109. the
(for the state of Mtnnesota.)
This assignmsnt q absolutely
attorneys for the state was at ali
times during the etrhl courteous
lawyer1tke and .digntheda except tina,
there were very manyh sexasperatinf
incidents during the trial that requir.
ed the utmost patience and control oi
temper on the part Of the. attos1eys
for the state and the court 80 endure
Many OF these se.inctdentsSWere oh.
vtously studied and pre-axranged fol
the. purpose OF Irritating the states
counsel, to the end that error would
be committed. The words used and
appearing III record do not give a.
adequate idea OF the conduct and
manner Of opposing counsel, which
were uniformly with but rare inter.
walls tnsolent and extremely OBJ.
noxious
)et,ourfns presu -.
''The publicity agent for q string o1
newspapers controlled by the Non
partisan league Of which the defend.
ants were respectively president and
manager was in court during thu
whole trial and furnished, copy fol
publication in these numerous paper,
which copy. as published during thu
trial and afterwards contained manJ
garbled and distorted statements ol
fact, statements Of purported occur.
rences during the trial which never
occurred, and vicious and untruthfu
accusatiOnss and attacks on the state'l
attorneys the court and county Of,
= ficials. Nj 8a 81. 5l5s f s
''The jury in the case was assailed
"a; being corrupt, I, witnesses for, thu
state accused ofA perjury. and othei
attempts made toscreate public senti.
ment In and around N jackson county
against the court 4 IA procoedings and
prosecution Of defend dants. I These %
X peFs w0re widely circulated In Jack.
y son and other counties Of the state.
Is Az to- assignment No. los preju,
dicial conduct upon the part Of thu
81 81 ~.