The Evening statesman. [volume] (Walla Walla, Wash.) 1903-1910, 1903-07-13
TEST OF
new LAW
Naking 1t a Felony to
Conduct Gambling
now BEFORE SUPREME COURT
Some of the Arguments Brought
Against the Validity of the
Statute.

Olympia.-The supreme court heard
arguments on the habeas corpus pro-
ceedings brought to test the constitu-
of the new anti-gambling
law, and then took the case under ad-
visement, granting Senator Will
Graves fifteen days time in which to
file extended briefs in the case
Senator Graves represents Fritz
Dietrich, the Spokane gambler, who
submitted to prosecution under the
new law in order to test its validity,
and is nov il Jail under sentence of
a year in the penitentiary.
Senator Graves applied for bail for
Dietrich. citing the fact that he is an
old man and has been in confinement
now for a month. He cited aUthOri-
ties which gave the court power 10
grant bail in a case of this kind, and
called attention to the fact that the
attorney general agreed with him as
10 the courts power. The question
of bail was also taken under advise
melt.
Claims 1t Is Amendatory.
Senator Graves based his cOnten-
ton as to the illegal imprisonment of
Dietrich entirely upon the claim that
the new anti gambling law is uncon-
stitutiOnal in that it is amendatory of
the statute Of 1879 covering the crime
of gambling in this state, while it fails
to set forth the subject matter of the
old statute it is resigned to change
The constitution Of this state. as
we'll as many others in the Union, pro
vides that no law shall be changed or
by subsequent statute unless
it sets forth the former act in full.
The anti gambling law passed by
this state in 1879 covers the crime of
gambling in beth public and private
places, making the violation a mis-
demeanOr and punishable by a heavy
fine
The act of 1903 makes no reference
to the former act but provides that
gambling in pubic places shall be
considered a felony and punished by
imprisonment in the state penitenti-
airy. 1t is the contention of Senator
Graves that this new law simply CRAFTS
a provisO on the earlier law and Sc
lects one crime from the old act and
provides that it shall be considered
more heinOus than under the former
statute. He contends that the legisla-
ture might as we'll have grated the
new law onto the old one; that the
only difference between that and this
is that the former was broader in it's
scope, that the sole effect of the act
Of 1903 Is to restrict the effect OF the
earlier act to add something to it
while no reference whatever. as to the
constitution provides, to any portion
Of the former act.
Precedent Cited.
9 The decision of the supreme court
of this state in the case Of George H.
Cheland versus James Helm, from
King county was largely relied upon
by Senator Graves.
In that case a legislative act of
1897, referring to exemptions c. per
sonal property, was under cOntertiOn.
The act Of 1897 provided that each
property holder should be held ex-
mpt from execution and attachement
Of $1,000 in addition to the property
exempt to him under the former stat
ute. The question was raised as to
the validity of the new law under the
same constitutional provision raised
ii this case.
The supreme court held that in that
case that the new law was not com
plete in itself. That it purpOrted to
add an additional section to the stat
ute relating to exemptions of personal
property, but purpOrted to and did in
graft into the section of the existing
statute providing for such exemption
an additional exemption which altered
its scope and effect
AS such it was held that it was
clearly amendatory and should have
set forth the section amended in full.
Judge Dunbar Interrupts.
In the midst Of his argument he was
interrupted by a question from Judge
dunbar as to why the new anti-gam-
bling law may not be considered a sep
arate and distinct law in that it re-
fers to gambling in public places and
leaves the question of private enter
prises Of the kind entirely as under
the previous law
Senator Graves said that this pos
itlOn might be good but for the fact
that the new law goes over in ey
press language a portion of the old
law, only increasing the penalty as TO
that portion of it.
Attorney General Stratton and his
assistant, E. w. Ross, both took the
stand in appearing against the issu-
ance of the writ of haveas corpus
that the law is constitutional in thai
It is separate and distinct from the
old one, covering the crime of gambl-
ing, and has no reference to that what
ever. They maintained thar the stare
Of Kansas is the only one which has
ever construed the constitutional nro-
vision that no law shall be amended
~ reference to mere title only. in IFS
more literal sense.
They Contended that this consritu-