The Bismarck tribune. [volume] (Bismarck, N.D.) 1916-current, 1929-01-04
test Advance for Cause Of Peace in New World Just Made

masters are o. vGzy great consequence
except - ~ co01e next - certain
statements that Weee made before ~
eTal1d t1ry, mseftd Ia affidavits bes0,
70 have boen % . certain form and
Il IN such form were very pgo5uolcdAl:
denied, hoWoveF, To have been n The
form seated DO not care % pass
upon the question Of These Statements
ct this time, o. I don't think Il q
necessary. I viii ~, however, that
I do not think Il Was fair to the de-
PENDANTS that such . condition q that
0hould have arisen In connection with
these indictmontA
The case Of the State ex rel 0haIer
vs.. the District Court Of tho Third
Judicial Dl1trlet = = case that throws
some light upon such . situation.
This u . case that u generally known
Is the 6candinavian-Amefican Bank
case, I believe. A Grand Jury Was
called in z manner somewhat similar
70 the manner here. and testimony
was taken In q very similar manner
covering large amounts Of testimony
and large numbers Of witnesses, and
In each case, as / understand It, the
Attorney General appeared Ia person.
Has Court Precedent
The Supreme Court, Of this state,
In that recent decision, has passed
upon one question that Is very vital
and directly involved In this action.
and u q precedent binding upon this
court at this time. It involves the
question Of the necessity Of placing
upon the indictment the name Of
every witness who has testified before
the Grand Jury. Doubtless In that
case the Attorney General being pres
ent In the grand jury room by right
and duty thought Il was not import.
ant that his name be placed upon the
indictment. and 1t consequently was
omitted. However. that case was dis
missed and the indictment was
quashed simply and solely because
his name MAS not 30 endorsed In the
indictment. and the Supreme Court
has stated that that should have been
done Notwithstanding the fact that
perhaps the rights Of the parties In.
VOWED, were not necessarily violated.
Or that they did not suffer,
because Of the fact that his name did
not appear. But nevertheless the law
required It and It WAS 30 ordered and
the indictment WAS quashed.
Coming to the cases before us. I
think that same rule win apply to
practically every indictment involved
here. think there Is not . single
case In which the names Of the wit
neqees L. correctly upon the indict-
ments, ana on everyone some name Is
omitted from the indictment - shown
By the records Of the secretary Of the
Grand Jury. This record has been
received from the Grand Jury. Upon
the day the Grand Jury WAS dismissed
that record WAS received and placed
in Z sealed envelope to b delivered
to the Clerk Of Court. and to b
opened only upon IN order from the
Court. During the hearing that en-
velope has been opened and the rec
ord has been closely examined BY
counsel on both sides Of this case.
The record discloses the fact that
many names Of persons examined
have been omitted from the iudict-
ments here before Us.
Now under the rule In this case Al
ready referred to- 1t would be neces-
sary to quash the indictments.
| n.aa srnsa ne,,n
i u-r1~~.,s.eSs.i,,- ~ -. !, ,,er.o,,nn1 -
lAh~ CssSs,6 - s rn YSS7 ~ ah,nsenn1
0cs,r+ a t,,,s .tete harHa6 dnr,n :
dscision -, TIA 49, 81 ~ stata -.
.1ch,,scn thirt that 49, ,avs
dcrs,, : ,,,,e thst !. ,,in6sne ,,r,or an
s~.,.t =, th,s sr.tsrc~ 0rH a ~
Crsrd Juror. hei,,r ersmined In cn,,rt
n that ,nssH e "a his NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS.
tA.tiSs.d thst he v,as rot disn,,s,ifiAri
-, ,,ssscr A. ;nses. that he ccs,s6 ~
Sssr TI,e 1870 discicee6 hnvevsr
thet ~ 80 8 etcrrteiNer n ~ In
s st.H "a IA oti,er 6saiinss ~,ith
ths '1 s mat s 1nvoIve6 m cffecfss
his personal interest, and the Court
held that his bare statement that he
WAS not disqualified and not biased
and not prajudioed vas to be cousid-
cred In the liglat of his interest, and
the lower court was reversed for the
reason that It had not held this
erand Juror disqualified. and that In
dictmeut waS olAash1d.
We have In these cases before us.
as the record shows, . certain Grand
Juror who WAS depositor In the Bis
mArck Bauk--e situation similar to
the ono IA the case OF the state VI.
johnson. II Ne follow that decision,