The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1898-06-21
NOT IMPRISONED FOR DEBT
Attorney Bennett Says A. K. Fulford
Was Arrested for Contempt
Not Debt.
To the Editor of the State Journal:

Not Debt
To the Editor of the State Journal;
There appeared an article in your
paper a few days ago, headed, 'Impris-
onment for debit Following that APP
peared the announcement of John L.
Guy as candidate for the position of
probate judge of Shawnee county, Kan
sas, in which he used the following
language: II have faithfully supported
the tickets and patiently abide my time,
Rest assured. If elected I will never
throw people into Jail for debt
presume this article that appeared in
ferred to the Imprisonment of A K.
Fulford by the order of the probate
judge.
The facts In this case are these:
Arthur Massey, who Is plaintiff in this
case, runs a blacksmith shop in this
city. Mr.. Fulford, who is imprisoned,
is a contractor and has great num-
Der of horses that he uses in conduct
ing his business. About five years ago,
Mr.. F'ulford began to bring his horses
to Massey to have them ShOd. He con-
ttnued to have them shod there until
short time before this suit was COM
menced; which was about four months
ago. Massey's bill for horseshoeing
during this period amounted to 1868.
Mr.. Massey earned every dollar of this
1858 by the sweat Of his brow, shoeing
the horses of Fulford. FuIford let the
bill run on, until it became necessary.
in order to collect it, to commence suit.
ment against Fulford for work and la
Dor. The law, In order to protect la
boring people, and in order to insure
the collection OF money earned like
Massey did, in small sums, and hard
labor, allows no exemptions from these
judgments. 1t is made one of the
most sacred judgments known to the
law. 1t enables the labOring man to
get his pay, if the man for whom he
works has any property upon which an
execution can be levied. After this
ND mt
were instituted against Fulford in or
der to ascertain If he had any property
upon which process could be levied.
The court granted a restraining order
at the beginning of these proceedings
prohibiting FulfOrd from disposing of
any property he had, or which might
come into his possession during the
tendency of the proceedings. Notwith
standing this restraining order he col
lected from the board of county COM
misSionerS, of Shawnee county, Sal
which belonged to him and deliberately
proceeded to dispose of it. 1t was a
fragrant violation of the injunction or
der and no man should have any sym
pathy for any one who IS guilty OF such-
violation. When called upon by the
court to give an explanation as to why
he disposed of this money, Mr.. Fulford
could give no excuse. Proceedings were
instituted against him for contempt of
court, and at his request a jury under
the new law was impaneled and he was
tried and found guilty, and as a result
mitted to Jail until the fine was paid.
That is the reason Mr.. Fulford is in
Jail. Mr. Guy would not certainly wish
to make a campaign on the assurance
that he will not enforce orders of his
court, or compel men to obey his or
ders, or will prevent the poor man who
has worked hard for his money and has
procured a Judgment, from collecting
it. 1 do not know whether he under
stood the facts in this case, but Judge
Dolman could not have done anything
different under the circumstances. If
Mr. Dolman had done otherwise in this
case, he would not only have violated
his oath of office, but he would have
committed an offense for which he
could have been removed from Office. I
He did nothing but his plain duty. A
man comes into his court who had been
shoeing horses for another man for five
long years, and he makes his living out .
of the small sums of money he earns |
each day by his trade. Mr.. Guy indi- |
Gates that he would not compel the |
man to pay this man who earns his |
living by hard labor, and if this is his |
position, an explanation is surely due |
from him. Yours respectfully,
F. E. BENNETT.
ToDaIxa Kansas June 90 1898.