The Topeka state journal., 1911-08-01
HE COLLECTED.

suggest lndI i nave no IDJccbAbi -
], any article seeking to give facts Ie-
Rarding my administration as countN
attorney. The people have IL riSn- 10
this information, and represe ntatiVs
newspaper should give the faGts 70
their readers; but the papers should
give all the facts. in justice to the
official and also because their readers
are entitled to accurate information
Now there are a few facts that l
which to call to the attention of the
readers of the State Journal and L
feel sure that their omission was not
intentional on the part of the reporter
who wrote the Saturday story, but
was wholly inadvertant and because
he did not have this additional n
formation at hand when he wrote the
story.
Fees in Injunction Cases.
Here are a few things to bear in
mind about fees in injunction cases;
First, the amount of the fee is always
fxed nv the Judge He fixes what lie
believes to be a reasonable fee, after
hearing evidence as to what reason
able fee would be. This fee is taxed
as part of the costs in the case. Sec
ond the fee is never charged against
the county but only against the de-
fendant, and the taxpayers never pay
a single cent of it. These fees come
wholly from faWbreakers, and then
only when they have property out of
which they can be collected. II 4
property owner knows that a Joint Is
being operated in his building, then,
and in that case only, is his property
subject to a lien for the costs of an
Injunction case. This is just and
proper because the property owner In
such a case is a party to the violation
" of the law.
The State journal also said I had
received $500 in fees in injunction cases.
This is & slight error as I have only
received $3.50 to date from this source.
Fees in three cases never will be col
ha dfa nj
property out of which collection can
be forced, and I believe that is true
of a majority Of pending cases.
For 26 years the statute has provld-
ed that in liquor cases fee OF 80
shall be taxed as a part Of the costs
against the defendant on each count
on which he is convicted. The county
is net liable for this fee, and it is
only collected If the defendant is able
to pay it. From this source 1 have
received $3.50 IN nine cases There is
nothing to conceal about any OF these
fees as they are all a matter or pub-
lie record N the office or the clerk OF
the district court. 1 have been glad 10
receive them and I have no apology to
make However, I have not had the
good fortune to receive as large teeS
in liquor cases as my predecessor, Alr:
John T. Schenck, who received rec OF
$500 in the case of State VS. Curtis, and
another fee of $475 in the case of State
VS. Shoaf These fees received by Mr..
= Schenck were perfectly legitimate, anu
in respect to their size I am frank to
saw that I am enViOus of my predeces-
sor.
The Utility of the Injunction.
have rot hesitated to use every le-
gal measure know of to enforce the
prohibiuory law. Officials who have been
successful in enforcing this law, rec
ognize the effectiveness Of the iniunc-
ton BY this method Kansas City,
Kan, was cleaned up. After an in
junction is procured on a building. II
any one in the future, even without
actual notice of the injunction, sells IL
duors in such building or maintains a
liQu1r nuisance therein, upon affidavit
filed showing that fact the district
Judge viii issue a warrant FOR the ar
rest of such per1On and he IS arrest
ed forthwith and brought before tho
judge to answer for contempt Of court
in violating the injunction speedy
trial is haG before the court, without
n jury, and if the court finds that such
person has violated the injunction SEN
tence will be in posed cf not less than
500 fine and Imprisonment in the coun-
ty jail CT 80 lays, and the court may
impose "A fne of $500 and six months
in iail. Courts d. not grant ln1unctonS
to be violated, and ordinarily n person
Violating an Injunction will Re more Sc
verely punished than the defendant in
q criminal case for violating the pro-
hibitory law.
Then. again. if IN injunction is vio-
lated, the court has power to abate
the nuisance IL that place by ousting
the guilty persons and putting pad
lock upon the doors of the building.
When property owners realize that
their property may be subjected to a
lien for costs, and their building lock-
cd up and rendered unremuneratiVe'
they win be more particular IL select
ing their tenants, and such proceed
ings have the effect of making the pro-
perty owner special policeman to sec
that the law is not violated, and places
him upon the side of law enforcement.
A case in point Will illustrate this
proposition. Some time ago 1 obtain
ed an injunction against Leila Dotson
and on the building at 513 East First
street Since then she has persistent
" violated that injunction and about
two weeks ago I filed contempt pro-
ceediugs against Leila Dotson and she
will have to answer for contempt of
court. have today filed an applica-
ton before Judge Whitcomb to abate
the liuucr nuisance in that building by
ousting Leila Dotson and putting
nadlOcS on the building. other in
functions secured by me have been Vi
olated, and for the past month L have
been holding inquisitions getting eVl-
dence against these violations, and in
the next day or two about dozen
tointists will be brought into court to
answer for contempt. have not pro-
claimed my intentions from the house
tops. but have been quietly gathering
this evidence, and have now secured
sufficient evidence to secure convic-
tions, and am ready to proceed along
this line.
If I am able to secure convictions in
these contempt cases, and paddock a
lew buildings. it will put crimp into
Z sone of these violators Of the prohibit
tory law and also wake UP some of the
property owners to their responsibility
IN the enforcement OF law.
The 500 Reward From Stubbs.
The language used by the reporter
with reference to the $10O received by
me from the governors contingent