The Mankato free press., 1915-03-19
Judge Childress Holds Against
Granting Any Reward
From Fridays Dsllv.

From Fridays 5sIiy.
ogatonna, March IA mule
is not a horse. and the captors Of a
mule-thlef are not entitled to the re.
ward offered by the state for the
capture OF a horse-thief.
Such is the gist OF the order
handed down by Judge Childress
Wednesday In the matter OF the ap.
plications for a reward for the cap
ture Of Thomas Greer who recently
tried TO steal Fred Ahrens' team of
mules but did not get away with It.
The hearing on the applications was
neld at the courthouse Monday.
and the court heard the claims ad.
vanced by @. j. ost. Sheriff Bern
hard Fisher OF waseca county,
Marshal Thomas Courtney OF New
Richland. r. Madden. A. Madden.
etc. for the reward OF 5000 offered
by the state for the capture OF a
hOrse.thief
Pareeling Out The Credit
Judge CbIldress In his order went
did twenty-five per cent of the work
of capturing the thief. and that
Sheriff Fisher did the other sew.
Cnty.five per cent. but there the
court stopped in his encouragement,
OF tile claimants named. and wound
up the order by declaring that neith-
or they nor anyone else were en-.
titled TO. the formal reward for
the capture of Greer.
In his memorandum giving rea.
Sous for his position the judge
wakes positively facetious although
there is cold comfort for the claim
ants in his humor. The memorandum
reads:
intent Of Legislature.
Il don't believe il was the inten-
ton OF the Legislature to include
mules under the statute providing
for the payment OF a reward to
those who capture horse-thieyes. We
have very few mules (of the horse
kind) in Minnesota and IL is APP.
parent TO my mind that they were
not thought OF. The main object of
this law, as understand II. Is to
enable the authorities TO act speed.
lily because one who steals horse
is quite likely 10 make a speedy es,
cape. But this will seldom happen IN
the case OF a mule. lr one. sue.
ceeds in getting a mule TO go away
from home at all he Is doing ex-
81 a,.I t.f, A.
go rapidly is out of the ordinary
Same Reasoning Applies.
The same reasoning applies IL he
is stolen from some place other than
his home lie viii go home cheerfully
aud freely enough but as a general
thing has mulish notions about 60.
ing the other way. hope this will
not be taken as a libel OF the mule
Far be 10 from me to libel an ami.
NAL who thinks so much of home
The statute under consideration must
receive, a strict and literal. construc,
tion. In that respect II is like
penal statute. Remedial statutes are
ordinarily construed libcraIly. hut
where money is TO be paid out of the
public treasury as i'm the case OF the
capture OF horse thief the con.
structlon of the law should be literal.
This law does not mention a mule
thief. II Is true the mule is the of
spring OF a mare and jackass and
hence is OF the, horse kind-has some
of the horse characteristics. such as
horse sense-but ] think Il has more
Of the ass characteristics than OF
the horse.
Wherein the Difference.
In fact the principal difference be-.
tween the mule and the ass Is the
lack OF gender i'm the mule. Mules1
are also the offsprings OF stalllons
and jenny asses. The ass like the
horse has its two genders and the
mule is the result OF n cross between
the horse and ass. One who steals
an ass, an OK or a COW could not be
called horse-thief. This is a matter
that has never been decided by any
court OF last resort that I am aware
OF and therefore I have had no au.
thorities to follow. have given the
statute strict construction as Il is
not for the court to make the law
but TO interpret It. II one who cap.
lures mule thief Is entitled to a re-
ward think IL is incumbent upon the
legislature TO say SO and not the
court