The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1905-04-17
One.
Judge Hazen Attacks Validity
Of City Ordinance.
Claims Liquor Law Doesn't Con-
form to Charter Act.
UP TO JUDGE DANA.
Sustaining This Contention
Would Be Far Reaching.
One Hundred and Sixty Appeal
Cases Might Go by Board.
JP TO JUDGE DANA.

On account Of a point raised by z. T.
Hazen against the city ordinance to
regulate the sale of liquor, and argued
before Judge Dana in the district court
this afternoon on a motion to quash the
cases brought against Vincent Kaczyn-
ski and r. F. Hodgins, the ordinance
may be declared invalid and the $50 IL
quor cases. pending in. the district court
on appeals from the police court. may
be thrown out of court.
HAGEN while he was judge of the dis
trict court, heard arguments directed
against this city ordinance by lawyers
who were defending persons convicted
under the ordinance in police court.
Many legal points were raised against
the ordinance but none Of the points
raised invalidated the ordinance in the
that the ordinance was good and valid.
Appeals were taken to the supreme
court and the higher court sustained the
Judgment of Hazen in the district
court.
Now Hazen comes before the district
court, and will go to the supreme court
before the point is settled, attacking the
validity of the ordinance on a new point
which was not raised in the district
court nor the supreme court when the
other attacks were made against the
ordinance.
This morning Hazen filed before
cases arising from the arrest Of
Kaczynsk and Hodgins by Chief of
Police Stahl, charging them with sell
ing liquor Illegally at their ice and cold
storage plant Kaczynsh and Hodgiins
were tried in police court and Judge
Hamilton found them guilty. Kaczyn-
ski and HOdginS claimed that they were
WrOngfully accused as they sold no IL
quors but kept it in storage only for
other persons. The case was appealed
from the police court to the district
court and is set for trial for this week.
Judge Hazenis motion to quash is
made on the ground that the ordinance
is Invalid because the penalty preScr1b-
ed by the ordinance is less than the city
charter authorizes and that the Ordin-
ance is therefore in violation of the
city charter act. The city charter act
provides that upon conviction for the
Illegal sale of liquor that the persons
found guilty shall be fined not less than
500 nor more than $500 and imposes a
Jail sentence of not less than 80 days
nor more than six months.
The city ordinance provides for a fine
of not less than 800 nor more than $500
and a jail sentence of not less than 80
dogs nor more than so days, which
maximum jail sentence is three months
less than the maximum Jail sentence
provided for in the city charter act.
The city ordinance took effect March
6, 1901, and was passed subsequent to
the city charter act, which took effect
Q
on city councils to pass ordinances for
the regulation of the sale of liquor.
The variance between the city char
ter act and the city ordinance has new
er been brought before either the dis
trict court or the supreme court, and as
the courts decided only as to the legali-
ty of the ordinance on the points raised
against it. this point has not been con-
sidered. The question viii undoubtedly
be taken to the supreme court no mat
ter how Judge Dana decides the motion
to quash, and if the decision is against
the ordinance the 159 cases instituted by
Stahl in the police court, and taken to
the district court on appeals, win go by
the board and the new city attorney,
Dreaming, viii lose his legacy.
Calen Nichols brought two habeas
| corpus cases in the district court this
morning asking for the release of G..
Oswald and R. Van Tuyl from the city
! Jail They were convicted under this
/ same ordinance and Nichols basis his
petition for release of the prisoners,
who were convicted and failed to give
appeal bonds. on the invalidity Of the
1 ordinance. The decision of the motion
brought by Judge Hazen will settle
/ Nichols habeas corpus cases.