The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1899-07-18
MAKES HIS ANSWER
Police Judge Mitchell Goes
After Mr.. Amidon.
SAYS ENOCH HAS NO RIGHT
To the Office to Which He
Was Elected.

Police Judge D. A. Mitchell has. by hi,
attorneys. Adams & Adams and Sankey
& Campbell, filed his answer to the peti.
ton Of z. z. Enoch. or. rather, to the pc
tition of the county attorney, who is act.
| ing In the name Of the state, to Gust Mr.
Mitchell from the Office OF police Judge
to which ONCE 2. e. Enoch was elected
at the spring election. The action of the
state, on relation Of the county attorney
was filed several months ago, after Mr.
Enoch had tried other means to get pos
session of the office OF police Judge, and
Mr.. Mitchelrs attorneys filed demurrer
to the petition but afterwards withdrew
it. Yesterday afr. Mitchelrs attorneys
| filed their answer to the original action
taken by the prosecuting attorney and
the case is now supposed to be ready foE
the consideration of the court. Mr..
Mitchelrs attorneys claim that there has
been no vacancy of the office of police
judge, and that Judge MitchelTs term for
which he was appointed holds good un-
til July, 1900. They do not deny that Mr..
Enoch was elected to the office and was
legally qualified, ETC., but they contend
that these facts have nothing to do with
the case and consider that the plaintiff g
action is misjoinder of causes, and fur
ther, they aver that the state, on rela-
ton of 8. p. Amidon. as county attorney,
has no right nor legal authority to try
the case of busting Judge Mitchell, be-
cause the city has fits own legal machin-
cry and Is able to take care of its own
business.
The answer, with regard to its princi-
pal features, IL as follows:
Defendant says as to whether one =.
z. Enoch was nominated and elected as
police judge, as alleged in plaintiffs pc
tition. at the city election in the city of
Wichita, Kan, in April, 1899, and was Q
properly qualified elector of said city,
and gave bond, as alleged, ETC., defend
ant has no sufficient knowledge to affirm
or deny same, but alleges that all of said
allegations are wholly irnmaterial. and
present no issue in this case, and ought
not to be considered. That the attempt
to unite the claims Of z. q. Enoch to
said ONCE with plaintiffs action is q
misjoinder of causes of action and de-
PENDANT objects thereto and pleads such
rejoinder.
Defendant further answering alleges
that there was no vacancy in the ONCE
of police judge In April, 1899, nor at any
time since.
THAT for several years prior to July
I, 1898, there were police commissioners
5,.I,,
time, and the appointment OF police Judge
had been made by said boards OF police
commissioners.
THAT on July I. 1898. the governor Of
the state Of Kansas, by proclamation,
abolished the police commission for the
city Of Wichita, and the same has not
been revived.
''That on due notice OF the adjustment
of police. commission the mayor of the
city duly appointed the defendant to the
office of police judge of said city Of
Wichita for a period of two years, as
provided by law, and that said appoint
ment made by the mayor was by the
council duly confirmed. and ever since
and is now discharging duties thereof
under said appointment.
appointed will not expire until July 1,
1900. and until such time the defendant
is both the de factofand the de jurs po-
lice judge OF said city of Wichita.
Defendant further alleges that the
state, on the relation of S. d. Amidon,
county attorney, is not the proper per-
son to maintain this action-that said
county attorney has no authority in law
to bring or maintain the action; that the
office of police judge is not such police
office as gives the county attorney au-
thority to maintain the action of quo
warranto.
THAT the city of wichita is city Of
the first class and has a duly elected and
qualified city attorney. who by law has
exclusive authority to maintain an action
to test the right Of the police Judge to
hold his office. That the said city has
also the full legal machinery to deter
mine who is the legal police judge.
Wherefore the defendant prays that
PLAINTIFFS action may be dismissed and
that defendant may be adjudged to be
the proper and legal police judge. and
that he have judgment against plaintiff
for costs"
Mr.. Enoch called to see the document
yesterday, and asked as to his opinion OF
1t. he said he did not consider II as
strong a plea for Judge Mitchell as was
the demurrer which was fled and then
withdrawn. He said II contained about
the same allegations as did the demur-
rer. He felt very hopeful Of securing
legal Gust OF Judge Mitchell as soon as
a. - Il