The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1912-03-15
MUST PAY 1T over.
CONTINUED from Page One.l

While acting as chief of police In
1904 Mr.. Stahl arrested a number of
liquor dealers and drug store keepers
and confiscated liquor and parapher-
MALTA amounting to $337027. There were
II cases and but 10 defendants and in
each case money aggregating from so
to as much as $685. was involved. The
persons who were arrested and made
defendants in these cases, replevined
the property which was taken away
from them. Mr.. Stahl did not believe
that the liquor should be returned on
account of city ordinance which pro-
Vided for the searching of premises
where LIQUOR was sold and for seiziug
all liquor and fixtures which were used
in conducting such business. AS
result, it was decided to fight the re-
pleVin and one of the cases was tried
out on a demurrer. Y. Il. Hazen, VINO
was Judge of the district court at that
time heard the evidence and arguments
and overruled the demur on the
grounds that the city ordinance was
not valid. An appeal was taken to the
supreme court where the decision or
the lower court was reversed and the
ordinance pronounced valid. On this
decision the liquor dealers who reple-
Vined liquor or paraphernalia, were re-
Quired to return the goods or the value
thereof AS a result, none mad the
goods and Mr.. Stahl was given judg-
ment against them.
At the beginning of these hoStiEitieS
C. +. Spencer, who was city attorney
at that time, said that he did not be-
lieve the ordinance was valid and told
Mr. StahI so. Mr.. Spencer further
stated that if Mr.. Stahl continued the
controversy and attempted to recover
the repIevined property that he must
do so as an individual at his own ex-
pense and own risk. Owing to the
doubt as to the validity of the ordin-
ance which provided for the search and
seizure, that he as city attorney did
not wish to become involved in such
litigation.
The List of Cases.
The following is the list of defend
ants and the amount of the judgments
against them:
E. S. Lee, SS94.25. Paid.
Frank Keith, $685..
w. F. Lake, $3.50. Paid.
E. L. Evans, file No. 22,876. $323;
No 22,s8O, $500; No. 23.046, $45o-67.
w. A. Karr, $240.
Charles NJ. Hines, 1897. Paid by
bondsman.
George Knauer, 1924
Will Haslip, $50.
Nick Nobel, defendant died and
case dismissed by agreement.
OF the above judgments, Mr..
Stahl. through his attorney, William
H CoWles, collected judgments
against Messrs. E. S. Lee and w. F.
Lake. The judgment against Mr.
Hines was collected from his bonds
man, as has a number CT others of
which no one has a record except
Mr.. Stahl
Before these cases had been called
for trial in the district court the
second time, the decision of the su-
preme court was such that there was
no reason why the liquor men could
recover their property by replevin.
Judge Dana. who had since been
elected and seated ruled that the
liquor had been seized legally and
| through a legal process. The deci-
sion was again taken to the supreme
court where it was affirmed.
The rest of the cases were then
tried out in the district court and
judgments rendered in accordance
and the same as in the one case
which had been used as a test case.
All of the cases were then taken
to the supreme court, which ruled
that the property must be returned
or the value thereof
AS stated above. a number of the
defendants paid the judgments, but
collection was impossible in the ma
jority of them
Only $4,000 Collected.
According to Mr.. CoWles only about
| $1,000 has been collected on these judg
ments, leaving more than 81, 800 which
could not be collected. Some of the
| cases were small or but little involved