Gilpin observer., 1905-03-30
AFFAIRS OF STATE in COLORADO
Highway Robbery Bill.


Because he once looked down the
barrel Of q gun held in the hand Of q
"stick-up-gent." Senator Anfenger yes
terday afternoon made a heroic effort
to save his bill increasing the terms Of
sentence for robbery.
Although the bill finally passed with
the maximum sentence, forty years.
untouched, it was practically killed,
for Senator Hill succeeded in getting
an amendment through leaving the
minimum penalty to be fixed In the
discretion Of the court.
Senator Anfenger introduced his bill
at the request of the district attorneys
Office, and it was drafted as a result
Of the long series OF holdups with
which Denver has been suffering for
several years. 1t is based upon the
stringent Illinois law, the operation of
which is said to have resulted in q
marked decrease in that state of high
way robberies. Under the present law
in Colorado the most a convicted hold
up can get is fourteen years, and it is
said that it is because Of the laxity Of
the local law which caused Denver to
become infested with robbers of this
character q year or SO back.
The first section Of the Anfenger bill
which was the only one allowed by
the committee, reads as follows:
Every person who shall be con-
victed Of feloniously taking the prop
erty Of another from his person or in
his presence and against his will, by
force or violence to his person, or by
the use Of any drug or liquor, or by
putting him in fear of some immediate
injury to his person, or who shall be
convicted of feloniously taking the
property Of another from the person of
his wife, servant. clerk or agent, in
charge thereof, and against the will
of such wife, servant, clerk or agent.
by violence to the person of such wife,
servant, clerk or agent, or by putting
him or her in fear of some immediate
injury to his or her person, shall be ad-
judged guilty Of robbery in the first
degree"
The punishment for robbery in the
first degree was fixed by the bill at
not less than ten years Imprisonment
in the penitentiary. nor more than
forty years.
Senator Parks, when the considera-
tion Of the bill came on. wanted the
minimum sentence raised to twenty
five years, and made this an amend
ment.
Senator Hill objected and offered
substitute amendment striking out the
minimum sentence altogether.
1T seems q little inconsistent" he
said. for Senator Anfenger, who has
fathered all the juvenile court bills, to
come before us with bill of this kind.
I am against this minimum sentence
for the reason that it often happens
that holdups are committed by young
boys. To take ten years out Of their
lives is to give them no chance what
ever at reformation"
"I admit that in this bill and in my
juvenile court bills 1t looks like was
playing on both sides of the fence"
replied Senator Anfenger. But hold.
ups are not committed by the boys of
Judge Lindsey's court. II they are
committed by young men at all they
are nearly always ex-convicts or with
strong criminal tendencies.
ANY one who has ever had the ex-
perience, as have. Of being held up
at o'clock at night. will feel that ten
years is noe too heavy a minimum SEN
tence. I took just one look down the
barrel of that gun and then took to
my heels, and ever since have wanted
that fellow to come within the tolls of
the law. Any one knows that a hold-up.
if resisted. is prepared to kill. think
the law ought to be made as stringent
as possible"
Senator Hill took the position that
the tendency of modern times was to
leave the minimum sentence to the
court. He said that in recent years
Congress had left this matter entirely
to the federal judges to decide.
Upon a vote the Hill amendment
carried, and then the bill was passed
on second reading with this amend
ment.