Evening times-Republican. [volume] (Marshalltown, Iowa) 1890-1923, 1915-06-05
IN ABSENCE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT"

I'm ABSENCE OF FORMAL COMPLAINT"
Down at Tabor two young men at
tended church services last Sunday
According to the newspaper dispatch
both were "stewed" and entered into
, the exercises with all the enthusiasm
of alcoholic stimulation. One drew and
brandished a knife. The marshal was
called and took the fellows to jail
here comes the nub of the whole story
lin the absence of formal complaint
both were released
| Now what was that marshal for?
He was the police force. Back of him
were the mayor and the city attorney
and back of those the county attorney.
The argument holds that all these were
elected or appointed to maintain the
peace Of the community. to move In
| matters like this where outrageous
| breach of the peace and the laws had
taken place. Why was no formal COM
plant lodged?
| The probability is that all of them
ducked out OF their plain duty by in
sisting that some citizen should
swear to an information before they
took formal note of those fellows who
| had got drunk and r:oted in a church
at Sunday service. There were
probably a hundred witnesses who
might have been summoned and who
would have sworn to the facts. The
marshal himself handcuffed the fell
low with the drawn knife. In the
absence of any formal complaint they
were released"
officers of that church come In for
their share Of the charge Of yellowness.
This was a peculiar case where insult
had been offered to their church and
their religious service and somebody
should have had sand enough to enter
complaint formally. The point of the
case is, however. that the sworn Off
GERS failed, that their oath to uphold
and execute the statutes was a bluff.
They ducked.
To the common citizen who notes
continuous violation Of law, dangerous
violation, common every day contempt
| Of statutes and ordinances there is a
vast difference between going crusad-
ing ON his lonesome, swearing out in
formation and assuming the duties OF
| a public prosecutor and calling the at
tention of the powers to such viola
tons and appearing as witness. He
is correct in his assumption that when
violations are common and to be seen
a dozen times daily by ordinary OBJ
servers that it is the duty OF those
charged with law enforcement to see
and correct them without an informa-
ton laid by the ordinary citizen. That
is what he thinks they are paid for
to stand between him and the neces-
sity of a personal crusade among his
acquaintance and business connec-
tons And sly as we keep 1t that is
what they are paid for. It is not their
part 20 take g man who has drawn
deadly weapon in a church at re-
ligious meeting to jail and turn hin
loose because some citizen has no
rushed in to file formal complaint" o.
an act Of which the officer is en-
t.rsiv cogc!zent IN his own and per
sonal knowledge. If that were not true
the policeman would be of small value
The common citizen would have tt
do his own police duty.
/ There Is a difference between thu
common complaint made in a genera
, way to officers charging all sorts O
things and the fact that law violation!
are within the common observation
. | the passing citizen and ought to b.
seen by those whose duty it is to SCI
and correct them. The fact is tina
when a peace officer passes up al
offense which he has observed ant
awaits an information from the in
;. dividual citizen that he is foreswor1
!, i to his duty. And Il Is vel enough :
. 20 a little farther and point out tina
common offenses, occurring dozens Q
times daily should be seen by tn
police as by the common observer
;. And when they do see and arrest a.
offender he ought not be turned loos
with a smiling admonit1on.