The Leon reporter. (Leon, Iowa) 1887-1930, 1905-11-30

THE
to the soldiers preference law. Litiga-
tion was avoided though, by an agree
meht to await the decision of the SUI
preme court on the Marshalltown case,
A score or more of other janitors and
employees about the state house are also
protected under the law giving veterans
preference and it is believed that even
custodian McCurdy himself. who en-
deavored to repudiate the act of the
legislature in the case of Tom Graham,
is given protection under the law and
may continue to hold his position as
long as he desires unless removed for
incompetency or misconduct.
Bishop and Weaver Dissent.
The decision of the supreme court,
which was handed down late last week
was not the unanimous opinion of
the justices, however, Associate Justice
Charles A. Bishop. of Des Moines, and
sllas M. Weaver, of Iowa Falls, dissent
ing. The majority opinion of the court
UNFOLDING the preference law, was
written by Chief Justice John c. Sher-
win, OF Mason City and was concurred
in by Associate Justice Emlin McI.ain,
OF Iowa City, Scott NJ. Ladd, of Sheldon,
and Horace E. Deemer, OF Red Oak.
The test case i'll which the decision
was rendered, was that brought by G. II.
Shaw, civil war veteran of MARSHALL
town, against the city council of Marsh
alltown last year. Shaw was an appli-
cant for appointment as city clerk and
claimed preference under the act of the
last legislature. The council, however,
refused to recognize the soldiers pref
erence law, and appointed another can
didate. Shaw brought suit in the dis
trict court. Judge Obed Caswell of the
district court decided adversely to
Shaw, however, declaring the law I'M
constitutional on the ground that it was
class legislation. On appeal to the
supreme court, the Iowa G. A. r. depart
ment became interested in the case and
Col. Charles A. Clarke made the leading
argument on behalf of Shaw before the
supreme court. Warren w. Walker, of
Des Moines, was also attorney for Shaw.
In unfolding the constitutionality of
the law, the supreme court accordingly
had to reverse the action of the district
court and remand the case back for
further determination in accordance
with it's decision upholding the law.
This will give Shaw the position of city
clerk of Marshalltown and may entitle
him to damages for the amount of salary
since he first made application for the
place, nearly two years ago.
Sherwin Writes the Opinion.
In unfolding the constitutionality of
the soldiers preference law, Chief Jus
tice Sherwin cites similar laws which
have been declared valid, in other
states, particularly New York, Kansas
and Massachusetts. He also refers to a
number of former Iowa legislatures Civ
ing preference or special privileges to
civil war veterans in matters of taxa
ton, homestead rights and exemptions
The holding Of public office is declared
not to be a privilege or immunity of
citizenship and in support Of this de-
tense to the charge of class legislation,
the supreme court cites the fact that
the constitution has already barred
women as class from the right of stuff
rage and from holding certain Offices.
Associate Justice Bishop, who wrote
the dissenting opinion concurred in by
Justice Weaver, declares that the sol
dlers' preference law is unconstitutional
under the declaration of the preamble
OF the constitution which declares that
"all men are free and equal What
have to contend and stated in sentence
is this" continues Justice Bishop, .that
in virtue of the provisions of the consti-
tuition, adopted long before the war of
the rebellion, there is conferred upon
and guaranteed to every citizen the
right, political in it's nature, to compete
on equal terms with every other citizen
for any office or employment created for
the benefit of the state. AS necessary
corrollary declare for the impotency
OF every legislative act whereby it is
sought to abridge or work Inequality in |
such right, and, in so declaring, do no
h"re than to announce my belief ia and |
adherence to the doctrine to which this |
court stands committed: See Chief
Justice Coles opinion in Clark VS. Board |
etc, ~ Iowa, 266, which is upon the |
attendance of coored children in spec
al schools; also decision in case of
State VS.. G;,rbroski, Ill Iowa, 1867"
The Dissenting View.
In concluding his opinion, Judge
5ighop says, concerning the law as in
,erpreted in this case:
Accordingly we might be compelled
o support an act if presented, providing
hat NJ BLACK men should be considered
or appointments while there remained
Whit" men willing to serve the state.
We would be compelled to remain silent
n the face of an act providing that a