The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-06-28
ROSE IS IN COURT
Mayor Appears Before Supreme
Court Today.
Gross Fire of Questions by the
Court.
HAD RIGHT OF WAY.
Only Case Submitted to the
Court Today.
Mrs. Rose Listens to Arguments
With Her Husband.

and Mrs Rose were DoLn present IN
the supreme court this morning at
the time set by the court for the argu-
ment of the contempt proceedings
commenced against Mayor Rose as
1 result OF his reelection to the Office
of mayor in alleged defiance of the
custer of the supreme court.
my wife came down to hear the
argument said Mayor Rose. sfbe-
cause she said that If anything hap
pened to me. she wanted to be pres
ent when it happened"
The argument lasted from 10 a. m.
until noon. Attorney General Cole
man SPOKE on behalf of the state. and
was followed by John H. Atwood, of
| Leavenworth, on behalf of the de-
tense. General Coleman then closed
for the state. C. F. Hutchings and
D. f. Bird. of Kansas City. attorneys
for Rose. were also present
During the course of Mr.. Atwood's s
argument various justices asked ques-
tions from the bench.
Roses case was the only one pre-
sented to the court today. It is being
pushed forward with extreme speed,
and the general belief is that the de-
cison will be rendered on the next
| opinion day, which is July T. one Of
| the actions of Mr.. Atwood today was
taken as an indication that the de-
Tense was expecting an adverse deci-
sion. After the argument had closed
Mr.. Atwood said:
Il would like to ask the court if
possible to arrange so that the defense
may be represented in court when this
case is decided SO that we may file
whatever papers are necessary
If Mr.. AtWood's client should win,
it would not be necessary for him to
file any papers In response to the
request, Chief Justice Johnston said:
can be notified"
Coleman's Argument.
Attorney General Coleman in opening
his argument tor the state, urged that
the resignation of Mayor Rose, after
having submitted himself to the juris-
diction of the court, did not divest the
court of any portion of its jurisdiction.
He held that the term of office for which
Mayor Rose was eousted did not expire
until 1907 In concluding he said:
THE conduct of the defendant in this
whole transaction has seemed to be
characterized with an utter disregard of
the binding force of the Judgment rem
dered, wholly in keeping with his dis
position toward the law as shown by
his own testimony taken in the prin-
| cipal case, and of which the court has
knowledge. A defiant intention unlaw-
fully; to violate the law in the conduct of
his office is aptIy followed by a defiant
purpose to disregard the judgment of
the court when lawfully pronounced: /:
| and it would seem enninently proper
that the court, with no sparing hand.
SHOULD apply its inherent constitutional
and statutory power to enforce the de-
cree. The defendants contempt is en-
hanced by the fact that the tribunal
before whose bar he is cahed. and whose
judgment he has disregarded, is the
highest recognized in this common
wealth, from whose DEGREES, within its
jurisdiction and except upon federal
questions. there can be no appeal, all of
which was well known to the defendant
We believe the order of the court
should be that unless the defendant,
within days to be named by the court
voluntarily purge himself Of his con
tempt by vacating the office into which
he has entered in violation Of the courts
judgment, and renouncing all claim
thereto, that he be committed to such
place of detention as the court shall
order until such time as he shall do so.
or until further ordered by the COURT
General Coleman also criticised the
answer which had been filed by Mr..
Atwood on behalf of the defense, and
said that Mr.. Atwood was making IN
warranted statements.
In his speech in reply, Mr.. Atwood
said that he would assume full re-
sponsibility for the answer; that he
wrote it in the absence of other attor-
neys- Il question the jurisdiction of
this court" said Mr.. Atwood but [
intend no disrespect The Judgment
was rendered under such circum-
stances that it did not give the court
an opportunity for investigation
Atwood Claims Judgment Is Void.
Mr.. Atwood declared that the judg-
ment was void because the action was
brought in the form of quo warranto.
when It might have been brought in
some other form. He held that the
court had ruled that it would not en-
terrain quo warranto proceedings
where there are other and adequate
remedies. He claimed that such other
remedies existed. He also contended
that the judgment rendered by the
court was contrary to the prayer of the
petition. He said:
ITO permit the attorney general to
pray for specific thing. to induce the
defendant to withdraw his answer. and
then have rendered Judgment at
variance with and in excess of the
Judgment prayed for is to countenance
the perpetration OF 4 fraud and for
that reISon and under The law above
cited ard quoted the PORTION of the
judgment now under consideration
must be held to b. void. and in excess
of the courts authority ever if iuris-
diction to act at all he conceded.
Before your honors can say that
". ". Rose acted in contempt you
must say that his title to the office is
not good, and thai his election was
unlawful.
Incident to the eIectcrzFio is the
right to be a candidate for Office. Sy
its judgment this court has said that
a new disqualification shall be i'm
posed by the constitution. If Rose can
not hold the Office of mayor, he car
whether a man can be given judicial