The daily sentinel. [volume] (Grand Junction, Colo.) 1893-current, 1906-03-09
THE MOTION oVERRULED
IN THE WELLS CASE.

This afternoon at half past one
O'Clock the motion made by Judge
Charles F. Casweli. attorney for A.
C. Wells. who is charged with Grim
inal assault on his step daughter. Mrs.
Helen Wells Moore. asking that the
case against Wells be dismissed on
the grounds that the act under which
the Indictment was brought is I'M
constitutional, was argued briefly by
Attorney Caswel and District Attor-
ney Selig before Judge Stevens.
Mr. Caswell commended that the
bill regulating the punishment for
the crime of statuatory rape was not
regularly passed by the legislature.
the constitutional requirements re-
garding the passing of a bill nor be
ing complied with. Judge Caswell
stated and offered the records of the
senate and house of representatives in
evidence. that the amendments made
TO the original bill changing the age
of consent and one or two other phas
es of the bill. had not been publish
ed in the record as the constitution
required and that there was no record
OF the final vote in the matter and
other constitutional requirements OF
"A similar nature. Judge Caswell CON
tended had not been respected in
the passage of the bill For these
reasons Judge Caswell asked that the
court declare the bill unconstiru-
tional. His arguments were very
forceful and many strong points in
support OF his contention were
brought out for the consideration of
the court
District Attorney selig's main con
tention in upholdng the constitute
ionality OF the law was that a record
. 4 fvtsr oil
contended should have been spread
upon the records of the legislature,
was not absolutely necessary to make
the law unconstitutional. presenting
that familiar rule of law that silence
in the matter like the one in question
could be interpreted as a presump
lion Of validity. Mr. Selig read from
decision of the supreme court where
question of nature somewhat
similar TO this was passed upon and
the court held that the law in ques-
ton was constitutional Mr.. Selig
stated that the declaring of this law
unconstitutional would practically
neeessitate the release of menserving
terms in the penitentiary for rape
and criminal assault. their conviction
being brought about under this law.
For this and no other reason he
stated that hardship would be work
ed ON the people of Colorado.
Judge Caswell in short rejoind
er stated that the only question for
the court 10 decide was whether OF
not the law in question was constitu
iionally enacted and no other ques-
lions were to be considered.
Judge stevens in lengthy and
clearly worded verbal opinion over
ruled the motion of Judge Caswell. /
Judge Stevens stated that the argu-
ment by each side had been very
forceful and reasonable but that he
could not sustain the motion for (
several reasons 1t was question !
MS to whether the old rule that
silence calls forth the presumption 1
lar case. For the district court to
declare the law unconstitutional !
would work r hardship on the people I
in so far as there would be no pres !
ent protection to large degreee from /
the crime or rape or criminal assault /
and that. while on the other hand l
II might work hardship on the de-
PENDANT taking II for granted that The I
law is unconstitutional, to refuse to
sustain the motion the court believ- I
ed that the same should be done as
appealing 10 the supreme court of
the state for a decision on the con
stitutionality. If we understand the /
court clearly Judge Stevens did not
directly pass upon the constitutional !
ity of the law but refused to sustain
the motion on the grounds that an APP
peal would be taken whether he-sus-
tanned or refused TO sustain, there
fore 1t would be nothing but just that
the supreme court. the court of last
appeal In the state, and not the dist
riot court, should be called upon TO
pass upon the eonstitutionality of the /
law Judge Caswell took exceptions
to the ruling.
The defendant then entered a plea |
Of not guilty, as he had not been call |
d upon to plead pending the argu
ment OF the motion.
The arguments and the courts de
cision attracted widespread atten-
ton. 1t is n most important and
vital question.
Both sides announced that they
would be ready for trial tomorrow
morning
Powell. the man charged with for
gerry. was released on his own recognize
ance to appear at the next term of
court The complaining witness in
the case could no be located hence
the confluence.
This completes the criminal dock
ct. excepting the Wells case.