The daily Gate City. [volume] (Keokuk, Iowa) 1855-1916, 1910-12-04
Anticipation Of Gate City in Fri
day Evenings Issue Was
Correct One as to Nature
of Peadnss.
wEBE FILED SATURDAY
Several Attorneys With Their Over
coat Pockets Bullying Under
Heavy Load Arrived
About $50.

PleadlngS In the contempt ana III
junction cases against twenty-five
Keokuk saloon-keepers were filed
Saturday afternoon. The Gate City
in Friday evenings issue anticipated
what action local attorneys would take
in the opening move for the defend
ants, and the forecast proved a
correct one In the contempt cases.
as was outlined, the attorneys filed
a motion to quash, and subject to 1t
was filed a motion for more SPECIFIC
statements. In the injunction cases
the pleadings consist of motion for
more specific statements, accompanied
by lengthy affidavit in which is set
out the specific manner in which the
defendant has been complying with
the mulct law. District court will be
reconvened by Judge Smyth Monday
afternoon at o'clock, at which time
the motions will come up for hearing
Copy of the pleadings filed have
Des Moines, attorney for the Anti
Saloon League, who represents the
prosecution in the cases.
Six Reasons Named.
The grounds on which the motion
to quash in the contempt proceedings
is based are the following:
1. The said so-called Information
does not set out the alleged facts
supposed to constitute the violation of
the injunction as required by section
2407 of the Code.
g The information is not verified
as required by law, nor does it either
in form or substance conform to the
requirements of the statutes of Iowa.
g. The said information on its face
shows affirmatively that E. e. Meeks,
who made the same, did not witness
the alleged misconduct OF the defen-
dant which is set forth as constituting
the supposed contempt, or have knowl-
edge of the same.
4. The alleged facts sre wholly in
sufficient to constitute a contempt
5. The court is without power or
jurisdiction to cause the arrest OF
defendant to an5wer the charge al
legged on mere rumor, or heresay.
6. The arrest of defendant was
and is in violation of his rights guar.
anteed by the fifth amendment to
the Constitution of the United States
and Section s of Article I of the
Constitution of the State of Iowa.
TWO Motions Alike.
The motion for more specific state
ments filed subject to the motion te
quash and the motion for more spe
cific statements in the injunction
cases are identical. The court is ask
ed to require the plaintiff to make hi.
petition more specific in the follow
ing particulars
1. That they state in what name
this defendant owned and kept in
toxicating liquors as beverage Oh
the premises occupied by him, and il
violation of law
2. That they particularly state i,
what way this defendant keeps o
has kept, and sold since December
1907, intoxicating liquors in his plac
of business, in Keokuk, Iowa, an
WHEREBY he is not exempt under, an
by virtue of the mulct law. from tn
penalties of the prohibitory law {
this state.
3. That they state in whae maj
her this defendant has violated ii
law, relative to the sale of intoxica
Ing liquors, by which he is not e,
empt under the provision of the null
law, to the penalty of the prohibition
law
4. That they specify, and especial
state which sale, or sales of intoxfc
ting liquors in violation of the la
We're made by this defendant on N
vember u, 1910
Asked to Give Names.
5. That they give the name,