Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1914-06-12
JONES CASE N COURT
INTERESTING ARGUMENTS TO De
SUBMITTED TO SUPREME
JUSTICES.
TWO AMENDMENTS TO
CONSTITUTION CONFLICT
Law Established Twenty Years Ago
and Nsvsr Before Questioned Held TO
Be illegal Provided Court sustains
Right Of County Attorneys to Return
Indictments.
Special to Times-R Republican.

Special to Times Republican.
Des Moines, June 11.-An argument
of exceptional interest may be ex-
pected when attorneys go before the
supreme court, probably next week, to
discuss the legality and constitutional
ity, not Of q law, but of an amendment
to the constitution itself. And it con-
Germs an amendment to the
constitution Of Iowa proposed
more than twenty years ago and not
before questioned
The controversy comes up on
a habeas corpus application on
behalf of Earle c. Jones. the
Corning music teacher, in the
state reformatory for five years for
alleged kidnapping of Grace Runyon,
with whom he eloped to get married.
According to the claim of the attorneys
for Jones he was induced to sign
confession of guilt, after which the
county attorney prepared an indict-
me1t, and the judge was called in at
private conference in the sheriff's
office sentenced Jones, all in the alb
sence of his attorneys.
Prosecutors Power Attacked.
The big point of the case is in regard
to the right of the county attorney to
give the judge jurisdiction. His &C
tion is based on law passed only
three years ago but which gave life to
an amendment to the constitution pro-
posed in 1882 and the later adopted by
vote Of the people. The attorneys claim
that the proceedings were irregular be-
cause:
The amendment was never proposed
10 the voters in regular and legal man
ner.
The amendment as voted upon was
not in form such that the voters
could rightfully adopt it.
Even if rightfully proposed and
adopted the amendment Is in itself
contrary to the constitution.
Though all else be regular still tho
act of the legislature was and Is un-
constitutional
But even everything else being right
the Judge acted illegally in sentencing
Jones at the time and place he did.
And anyway Jones never pleaded to
the indictment and the court had no
Jurisdiction.
The constitution OF Iowa originally
provided that persons accused OF
| felonies shall be held to answer only on
| presentation or indictment by a grand
| jury.
| In the nineteenth general assembly
Jan, 81, 1882, Mr.. DUNCAN proposed an
amendment to the constitution provid-
ing grand jury might consist OF from
| five to fifteen members. Later this
amendment was incorporated with
three or four others and there was add
! ed to 1t a provision that the general as
| sembly might also provide for fnd1ct-
ments without grand Jury. The
senate took up these four proposed
amendments and the record Is confus-
| ing as to what happened but IN the
| end on motion of Senator Larrabee the
resolution was passed. But 1t IS
claimed that the record utterly fails
to show that the particular amendment
was never proposed to the senate OF
ever voted on, and anyway all thas
seems to have been done was to nave
vote on four resolutions at once which
is contrary to law.
| Basis Of Attack.
| But the strong point against the
amendment is that it really is two
amendments. that it should have been
divided. and it was dead wrong to sub
NIT two amendments to the voters to
be voted on as one. In this respect the
identical question is raised on which
| the biennial election amendment was
nullified after 1t had been voted on
One part of the amendment proposes
change in the size Of the grand jury;
| the other proposes a substitute for q
grand jury or abolition Of the grand
| jury in certain contingencies. 1t ie
pointed out that as a matter Of fact
the first part Of the amendment was
needless since the legislature could
have changed the size Of the grand jury
at will.
Objection is made to the second part
Of the amendment because 1t does not
purport to amend the constitution but
rather to give the legislature authority
to amend it, and such delegation OF
authority is in itself unconstitutional
Hence as adopted the amendment wa:
a violation Of the constitution itself
The people, by vote, are alone en-.
powered to make or amend q constitu'
ton: they cannot delegate this RICH
to the legislature any more than thu
legislature can delegate to the people
the law making authority
Law Makes Distinction.
| The legality of the law is also chal
lenged because it makes distinction
between the man who Is indicted ant
the man who Is under information, ant
the latter can be required to plead t
the court in vacation while the forme
cannot. Hence the law, as passed, ha
features which operate as discrimina
ton.
The claim is made that in havin,
the court in the sherifr's office t.
sentence Jones it acted contrary t,
law because that is not the usual plac'
of holding court and 1t violated tn
rule as to publicity of court proceed
ings; also that the Jones confession
or plea, was made before the present
ment was framed up and he never il
fact pleaded to the information, henc
the court did not have jurisdiction.
Attorneys are preparing themselve
for a hard fight on the constitutions
phases of the case. Assistant Attorne.
General Fletcher is preparing the de
Tense for the state and will undertake
to show affirmatively that the proceed
ings We're regular all the way dow,
from 1882 to date. The full bench vii
hear the case as It involves some o
the most important questions befor
the court for a long time.
|