Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1913-05-03
.COSSON COMES
BACK At JUDGE.
FROM MARSHALL
Attorney General in Brief
Filed in Supreme Court
Says Upholding Lower
Court Will Nullify Law.
IBY ORA WILLIAMs.]

Des Moines, May Attorney Gen
eral George Cosson makes vigorous
come back In the argumentative COM
bat he is having with Judge Bradshaw
Of Toledo, or rather with County At
torney Daley Of Marshall county, over
the duty Of the attorney general not
to assist the county attorney Dut 70
supervise his conduct and to appear
before the grand jury, the court OF
any other tribunal In relation to Law
enforcement.
Undoubtedly the certioran case from
Marshall county will be orally argued
in the supreme court at the next sit-
ting. It is beginning to attract Wlde
attention from the fact that upon tne
decision rendered will rest the success
or failure Of the general line OF law
enforcement measures OF the lnlrty-
third general assembly.
Large reliance seemed to have been
placed in the brief for the court on the
fact that the court itself has power to
effect remedy If the county attorney
Is not doing his duty. To this Cosson
replies:
cosson Defends Acts.
ut is clear to any citizen OF this
state who has been an ordinary OBJ
server of events that whatever power
and control the district court may ex-
ercise over a county attorney Is not
sufficient to go to the root Of the evil
which was sought to be reached by the
passage OF certain law enforcement
measures by the thirty-third general
assembly of Iowa, all Of the acts 10.
gether forming a series OF consistent
whole looking to the more enectual
enforcement of the law"
AS these are Mr.. Cosson's own laws
he is in position to speak with some
authority. He calls attention to the
fact that in the mulct law there was
placed provision that any Judge shall
suspend or remove from office any
county attorney who shall wilfully re-
fuse or neglect to perform certain
duties enjoined therein, but, he says:
.In spite OF this specific provision au-
thorizing the district court to remove
any county attorney, it is common
knowledge that no county attorney
was ever removed and that for num-
Der OF years the law was continuously
violated In certain parts OF the state.
LIT was because of the inadequacy OF
these laws in question that the law
enforcement measures were introduced
and passed by the thirty-third general
assembly"
says Would Nuliify Laws.
Mr.. Cosson calls attention to the
fact that 1t is a state law that is to
be enforced by state officer while
some courts are still under the spell
or the old Calhoun argument OF the au-
thority Of local community to null!fy
the laws OF sovereign power" but IN
fact all advancement In these matters
has been made by giving the state
officers more power. In conclusion he
says:
II ct me urge upon the court In con-
clusion that this is not moot ques-
ton and that II the decision Of the
lower court is to stand, it will emascu-
late and nullify the most important
provisions in the law enforcement
measures; It will make 1t possible
for any local community to nullify
state laws with impunity. The appear
ance Of the attorney general before q
grand Jury for the purpose OF cooper
ating with the county attorney and
presenting evidence before the grand
Jury can work neither affront nor In
Jury to any county attorney or court
who are anxious to see the law fairly
and impartially administered. It will
save many county attorney from en-
barrassment, especially those who have
been previously employed by persons
charged with the commission OF crime.
It will in no wise cripple the legitimate
power Of the district court with refer