The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1903-02-24
House Passes It After a Long
Discussion.
Provides That Jointists Must
Answer to City.
ONE CONVICTION TO DO.
Can Not Be Rearrested at Once
by County.
Waggener's Gas Franchise
Scheme Falls by Wayside.

adopted by the house last night, pro- /
hibits the prosecution of . joinrist or
any other law-b breaker who violates a
city ordinance and state law at the I
same time, after he has been prosecuted I
in the police court Under the present
law If a jointist is sued in the police /
court and either convicted or acquitted, /
he can be Immediately rearrested on a /
state warrant for violating the state
Sec. 121. In all cases not herein speci- /
fically provided for. the process and
proceedings shall be governed by the
laws regulating proceedings in justices
courts in criminal cases, except that no
jury shall be allowed: and it shall be
the duty of the court to keep j com
plete record of all proceedings in each
case, in like manner as justices of the
peace in criminal cases, and d judgment
of conviction or acquittal by said court
shall be a bar to any subsequent prose
cution for the same offense.
Representative Hutcheson Of Pratt
moved to strike out the last clause,
which contained the provision protect
ing law violators The motion was op-
posed by Waggener of Atchison and
Adams of Sedgwick, and supported b.
jerks of Franklin.
If this clause means ANYTHING, it is
put in here for the purpose of barring
something, and the courts would be
warranted in so holding. 1 am inform
ed that the district court of this county
has made ruling something like this"
Mr. Waggener said that prosecution
for violating a city ordinance would not
prevent prosecution for a state law.
jerks then asked why this clause
should be in the BILL but no satisfac-
tory answer was given.
Enright of Wyandotte, moved that All
amendment be made Of prohibitory
cases, and said this ought to be salts
factory At first Hutcheson was in
clined to accept Enright's amendment
1t seems that some of these provis-
ions are for the express purpose OF
nuii1fylng the state prohlbitOry law,
he said, and for that reason some of
the rest Of us who are In favor of up-
4 holding our state laws and see them
obeyed need to take q hand For that
reason accept the amendment
DR.. HutcheSOn afterwards changed
his mind and Enright's amendment was
voted down. Hutchesons s original mo-
ton to strike out the offending clause
/ was also defeated by a vote of % to 25
If this goes through the senate and
4 becomes q law it will allow jointists to
/ be arrested under a city ordinance and
taken into police court. and they can
! pay fines or be acquitted and cannot
! be prosecuted under the state law as at
! present.
Two other provisions were stricken
out of the bill providing that the city
might appeal from the judgments of
the police court in order to settle some
I question of law.
The objectiona bic features of the sec
! ton relating to the extension of gas
/ franchises were re0edied Original Ifs-
the bill compelled the mayor and coun-
Gil to extend existing franchises to forty
years if the holder of the franchise
accepted the provisions of the law
within three months This was amended
\ to provide that the franchise may.
with the consent of the mayor and
council, be extended for a period not
exceeding twenty years.
The public utilities article allows
cities to acquire possession of private
water plants through condemnation
proceedings in the district court, and
in return for its franchise privileges a
water company must furnish water to
the city for fire protection free of cost.
The reading of the bill CONSUMED
great deal of time last night and when
quorum present by good deal The bill
was therefore not completed last night.
but was left for final passage until
more members should be present.
This new city charter act is the one
which w A. s. Bird. formerly city
attorney of Topeka. prepared at the re-
quest of the municipal league of cities
of the first class. Mr.. Bird put in sew
eral months in its preparation, and
made it especially strong with regard
to public utilities. Then he submitted
his report to the municipal league and
it was discussed by the various officers
of all the cities of the first class in the
state. When they got through with it,
it was introduced in the legislature. It
makes a pamphlet of more than 100
pages.
Somebody. presumably some temper
ance element. is making a fight to keeo
in the city charter act the sections al
lowing the city the right Of appeal from
police court decisions, and to knock out
that provision which prohibits the
prosecution of offenders under state
laws after they have been prosecuted
in police court. The house last night
acted exactly the other way on these
propositions.
A great many members of the house
have received through the mails the fol-
lowing typewriter statement.
Section III allows amendment on ap-
peal from police court just as on appeal
from a Justice court to the district
rage of Justice for technical defects in
iriage of justice for technical defents III
procedure.
section lis merely preserves the law
as ii was intended to under existing
laws It in fact adds a right for cities
to appeal from the district court TO the
supreme court. For it was decided in
Wood Us. Topeka, So Kan. sos. that
while the existing statute gives that
right in terms, it is ineffectual because
the title of the act by which this was
4 authorized covered only appeals from
the police court TO the district couTs. SO
the section merely corrects that mistake
to meet the decision in the Wood case
The last two lines Of section 121 are
not in the existing law. The courts
have settled it in this state that the
same act may be a violation both of
city ordinance and Of a state law. and
may be punished under both.
Sections III and 11S ought to stand
1t seems obviously inappropriate to
Dec 4