The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1879-10-03
REPUBLICAN TICKET.
J.R DETWILER VS.. JUDGE TAI.
COTT

Mr.. Detwiler resides IN the city OF
Usage Mission, and is there the editor of
a monthly periodical, called the Temper
ance Banner. Mr.. d. is also Grand Wor-
thy Chief Templar of the Grand Lodge OF
Good Templars for Kansas.
We see from some of his editorials that
he is very much incensed at Judge Tai
colt because he fined some parties in
Usage Mission only $500, which parties
plead guilty to the charge of selling in
toxicating liquors without a license. We
also understand that he is using his
official position as means of ridiculing
and iJuring the Judge by making a
great ado with the members of the order
of which he is Chief in referring to what
he seems to think the great outrage.
Now, we des re to be fair with Mr., d.,
and will state that if the defendant or
defendants in those cases we're knowingly
and wilfully violating the law, we will
Join Mr.. D. in all his censures of Judge
Talcott But we understand the facts to
show differently. After some inquiries
we have ascertaiEed that the violation of
law by the defendants was technical
one. The facts were these: The county
attorney of Neosho county filed his in
formations in open court Judge Talcott
directed warrants to issue thereon; they
were issued by the clerk the defendants
were arrested and employed counsel; and
the case was set for trial at future
day. In the meantime the county attor-
ney examined the question and the facts
in the case, and ascertained that each of
the defendants had presented to the city
council sufficient petition; had paid
their tax and received the clerks receipt
for the same; but the city council,
through the carelessness of some of its
members, failed to obtain quorum for
the purpose of passing the necessary Or
dinances. Having obtained this infor-
NATION, the county attorney suggested
that the defendants were mere technical
Siolators of the law, and that small
fine be assessed. In accordance with
this suggestion. and after plea of
guilty, the Judge assessed the fine com
planned of. What more could the Judge
reasonably have done?
We are no lawyer, but understand
that it is the practice in all courts, that,
when the violation of law is technical,
the court, at the request of the prescott.
ing officer, will assess low fine, it the
parties save all trouble, costs and delay
by pleading guilty. All this was done
in these cases, if we understand the facts.
If we are mistaken in the facts, will Bro.
Detwiler show wherein, and give Us proof
thereof? Come, Bro. D., be fair and cor,
rect our mistake, or accompany your
.censures of the Judge with the facts, so
that the people may render their verdict
from the evidence, and not from your
conclusions.
This is written with the desire only
that Justice shall be done to one of our
citizens. and that his official acts may
not be misrepresented or misconstrued
The Judge has always believed in strict
enforcement Of the dram shop act; and,
as we understand, the only time he has
been reversed by the Supreme Court in
his interpretation of that law, was in .
case where he gave too strict construc>
ton against the dram shop keeper.