The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-10-06
Nay Have the Murder Charge
Wiped OF Slate.
Supreme Court Orders the Case
ReOpened Today.
BABY CASE.
Mother Wins a Point Against
Judge Smart.
Must Hear Notion for Writ OF
Habeas Corpus.

naDeas corpus.
Chauncey Dewey, Ed Mcbride ana
Clyde Wilson. the three men accused
OF numbering the Berrys IN the Raw
Inns county feud two years ago, wera
today granted a rehearing by the Kan
sas supreme court, of their motion to
dismiss the murder charge pending
against them in Rawlins county.
Several months ago the supreme
court decided that they could not In
terfere with the action of the lower
court in dismissing the murder charges
without prejudice" to future action.
That left it open for the charge of
murder to be revived against any OF
the three men as long as they I've.
Dewey and his two ranchmen appealed
to the supreme court to have the
cases dismissed without prejudice"
and absolutely free themselves from
possibility of ever being tried again.
The supreme court refused to inter
fere with the action of the lower court.
Attorney for the DeWeys made the
usual motion for a reheaTing Of their
plea before the supreme court, and
argued this motion. The decision of
the court today indicates that the three
men may yet succeed in getting out of
their sensational esca pade scot free.
without danger of future molestation-
Mother Of Incubator Baby Wins.
] The Incubator baby case was up in
the supreme court again today when
writ of 1nandamus was allowed by tbs
court to compel Charles A Smart, dis
trict judge at Lawrence to hear mo
ton for new trial which has been
asked for by Charlotte E. Bleakley,
who claims to be the mother Of tbs
Incubator baby"
The court says in its syllabus: IAN
| appeal win lie from a Judgment of the
district court In habeas corpus pro-
/ ceedings. to determine the rights OF
conflicting claimants to the custody OF
child
In the opinion, Judge Porter says:
! The learned judge of the trial court
must have misconceived the force and
effect Of Chap. S22. laws Of 1905, in re-
fusing to permit Mrs. Bleakley to give
/ a bond and stay proceedings Nothing
/ IN the findings of the court seem to
warrant the inference that there was
any special necessity for placing the
child in possession and control OF the
Barclays, pending the final determine
ton of the rights of the parties. The
$4,000 bond which the court required OF
! the successful party was one for which
no express provision is made by stat
4 ute, and changed the status of the
parties. Conditions might exist which
would authorize a court to require such
bond. but one which Mrs. Bleakley
asked to be permitted to give Is ex-
/ pressly provided for by statute and
/ preserves the status quo Her appiica
4 ton should have been granted and the
proceedings stayed"
The baby had been adopted by Mr..
and Mrs. Barclay in Rock Island. III.
/ Mrs Bleakley left Illinois and went to
Lawrence where habeas corpus pro
| ceedfngs were instituted by the Bar
/ c1ays to obtain possession Of the child.
/ The court adjudged that the Barclays
! should have the Chi and decreed that
.1~7.- NOT -r-ff fre
i Bleakley then asked for stay of exc
cution which was refused an then
asked for a new trial Before this was
taken up she disappeared from the state
with the child and has since been out
Of the state. She has been held in con-
tempt by Judge smart and when she
again tried to prosecute motion for 4
new trial this was refused by Judge
Smart on the ground that Mrs. Bleak
ley was in contempt. When she made
the second request for a new trial she
offered to purge herself Of contenIt
but this was denied. Judge Srklrt re-
fused to entertain the motion for re-
hearing of the case and the mandamus
proceedings were brought to compel him
| to do so. The opinion was written by
Judge Porter who held that Mrs. Bleak
ley should have a new trial.
state Wins Joint Cases
Three joint cases we're decided in
favor of the state. The cases were
against W E. Bailey from Linn county,
against c. a. Gregory from Norris
county and against J. L. Bursay from
Morris county W. E. Bailey brought
his case to the supreme court on the
ground that he was convicted OF main
tanning a nuisance when the state made
! specific charges Of sales OF liquor. Inc
court held that the admission OF the
nuisance count did not effect the yer
dict of the jury.
C. A. Gregory made his appeal on the
ground that an erroneous instruction
had been given by the trial judge but
was corrected in other Instructions.
The court held that this had ne eject
on the case
The court held in the case of Gregory.
| who Is a druggist, that the law requlr-
ing the purchaser Of liquor to sign the
/ affidavit in ink, and hold UP his hand
and be sworn. must be literally enforced
+ Gregory allowed people to sign In pencil
/ and did not swear his patrons
Fake Railroad Knocked Out.
! In the case Of the state Of Kansas,
/ ex rel c. G. Coleman, attorney general
/ aoainsf the Inner-Belt Railway com
many and the sStewart-Peek sand COM
I pany the supreme court holds that
the Inner-Belt Railway was not IN
corporated in good faith but for the
nurpose of securing possession Of GER
( tain valuable land on the river front at
I Kansas city by the right OF eminent
/ domain The proceeding in the su-
preme court was an original action
and the court says in fss opinion, 1t
lis decreedz and adjudged that the IN
corporation Of the Inner-Belt Halfway
/ company is null and void for fraud
i practiced by the incorporators IN pro-
/ curing such incorporation; that said
i Incorporates was illegal; that the said
+ corporation is ousted and debarred
from exercising any corporate pow