The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1906-11-02
lola Police Judge Must Answer
to People.
Charged With Collecting Fines
From JOintists.
APPEALED TO COURT.
Asked That Council Be PrOhib-
tied From Trying Him.
Court Holds That City Has Fol-
lowed Proper Course.

After hearing arguments IN ellalii
Thursday afternoon, the supreme coul
Of the state decided TO refuse the ap-
plication for a writ of prohibition In
the lola police judge custer case, ana
held that the city council Of lola could
go ahead and try Judge Fuller on enS
.cbarges OF. misconduct preferred against
Vim.
The charge against Judge Fuller Is
that he collected fines from police court
prisoners and failed to turn the money
over to the city; also that he received
money from joint keepers for the put-
pose of securing his influence in pro-
tectiHg them from punishment. A com
mittee from the council appointed to IN
veztigate the situation decided that
there was sufficient ground to warrant
charges being preferred against FuHer'
and proceeded to get up the charges III
formal manner and present them 10 lhe
council. The council set a Date loE
hearing the charges, and then FuHeI
went into the district court and secured
a temporary restraining order 10 pre-
vent the council from hearing the
charges, on the ground that the mem
bers of the council were preJualc5u
against him, and had made up t1sll
minds that the charges were true Inc
district court after hearing the eNluenSe'
sustained a demurrer OF the CITY 20 lue
plaintiff's petition, and refused 10 grant
q permanent injunction. Fuller s attoI-
neys then appealed the case to the su-
preme court, but the council announce
ed that it would go ahead and near the
case against Fuller on November ). Inc
attorneys for Fuller came before the
supreme court today asking for an or
der in the nature of supersedeas, 10
hold things in statu quo until the su-
preme court passes on the case
Judge Fuller himself was present at
the hearing which took place in Chief
Justice Johnston's office. The justice
present were Johnston. Smith, Green
and Graves.
Judge Fuller was represented by 9.
II. Apt and John Goshorn The city
was represented by City Attorney R.
I. CuIison and Travis Morse.
The attorneys for Fuller challenged
the right Of the city council to hear
the case under any circumstances. on
the ground that the office Of police (
judge is an elective one. and the city
council can not combine the legisla-
tive and judicial functions. They al
so cOntended that since a committee
composed of a majority of the mem
bers Of the council had brought the
charges, that it was equivalent to hay
ing the charge preferred and adjudi-
Gated by the same officers.
The attorneys fer the city held that
the city council had proceeded in the
manner laid down by the statutes for
purging the city of Objectionable Of
hcials, and that there was no other
way for MI Fuller to get hearing at
the present time. They said that he
might get into the courts later ON
through mandamus. They also stated
that they had an affidavit signed by
all the members of the council staff
ing that the members We're able to try
the case without prejudice.
The justices deliberated on the case
only about half an hour and then re-
turned d verbal decision refusing to
grant the writ of prohibition.
The application for the writ was g
follows:
Comes now Ira NJ. Fuller and moves
the court for an order granting a stav
and supersedeas i'm the above entitled
case until the final hearing of said
cause in this court and for reasons
therefor shows:
"That plaintiff in error presented his
petition and application to the district
court Of Allen county. Kansas. and that
upon the nearing thereof the said court
refused to make such writ permanent
but granted a temporary stay and tenn
p0rary writ for ten days from the pad
of October 1906. for the purpose of
presenting the same to this court; that
unless supersedeas is granted and stay
allowed by this court the said defend
ants in error viii proceed to pass ilde-
ment on the said charges without au-
thority of law. and viii Oust pIaintfff
from the office of police judge of the
city of lola Kansas: that plaintiff in
error has no remedy at law and can not
have fair and impartial hearing be-
fore the said defendants i'm error for
Athe reason that said defendants in er-
TOR have formed and expressed and
now have opinions on the said charges.
which they have formulated and made
without q hearing and viii render
judgment thereon and make orders
ousting the plaintiff by reason of such
bias prejudice and opinions"
DALNY IS OPEN.