The Rock Island Argus and daily union. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1920-1923, 1921-12-29

reports" have been involved, the
decision continues:
! Due process OF law" is both q
federal and state guaranty to ali
citizens. AS applied to judicial
proceedings it means, proceeding
upon inquiry which renders judy
ment only after trial. Every per
son, be he OF high and of exalted
position, or the most despicable
character in the state, has this
guaranty. II means under and
within the LAWN the orderly
channels provided by the law-and
sake of expediency or to satisfy
Interior motives
Press Given Tip.
There is also evidence in this
record that representatives of the
press were informed the day be
fore the grand jury reported, that
there would be something out of
the ordinary procedure for them.
This is reprehensible practice and
cannot be too severely condemned;
had it been made public before be-
I
courts duty would be plain.
However, the presiding judge of
the circuit court ordered it to be
spread of record; it thereby be-
came accessible to the public. and
if error was committed. it was aft
er it was presented to the court,
and is not a subject for review by
court of concurrent Jurisdiction.
1.-THE remaining points relied on
by the defense apply to certain in
dictments and to particular counts
thereof. We will discuss them in
the order in which they are raised.
1.-The first one is the embezzle-
ment of Len Small, number 1868.
Four Counts "Bad."
The first objection is that counts
two to six inclusive are bad be-
cause they do not contain the con-
stitutional averment, In the name
and by the authority of the people
of the state of illinois,
This allegation appears in the
first count, and is therefore, by the
rules of criminal pleading, made a
part of each subsequent count. This
allegation is considered a portion
of the caption and it is unneces-
sary to set it forth in each count.
THE following objections are
made with reference to the social
ed ENLIGHTENMENT indie m
against Sterling, Small and Curtis.
Number 1869:
(a) The indictment does not
bear the endorsement of the fore
man of the grand jury at the foot
of the endorsement, A true bill
"Cb) There is not sufficient al
legation of ownership, or posses
sion of property alleged to- have
been embezzled by Small and Cur
tbs.
"(c) No judiciary relation exist
ed between Small and Curtis and
the state of Illinois,"
After describing the endorsement
on the joint embezzlement indict-
ment and citing the law covering
the case, the decision continues:
Mandatory or Directory"
1.-THE real question seems to be
whether or not the above section is
mandatory or merely directory.
THE appellate court of the Third
district in the case of the People
versus Haxton, POI Ill. app. 584, in
an opinion written by Presiding
Justice Graves estates this section
is mandatory. and cite in support
thereof-People versus Bladke,
259 Ill SO.
while the Haxton case went to
the appellate court, and was re-
versed because the names of the
witnesses were not endorsed on
the back of the Indictment, it would
seem logical to hold that if that
portion of said section was manda-
tory surely the other portion of
the same section, which requires in
substance that the foreman of the
grand jury shall certify the indict-
ment as "a true bill' by signing his
name as foreman at the foot of said
endorsement, must be held to be
mandatory. The states of California,
New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania,
have statute that requires that all
wills shall be signed at the foot
thereof. 1t has been held in each
of those states by the court of last
resort that a will signed in any
other place is void.
Counsel for the state rely, to a
large extent, on holdings outside
of Illinois, but they are of no as
sistance unless they interpret
like statute.
Cites Old Case.
"The case of Bowman versus
People, 103 Ind, SO. is set out in
detail in their brief This seems
like an apt citation, but on careful
consideration we discover that that
case places a construction upon an
old statute that is not similar to
the present Illinois statute.
THE court holds that the above
section is mandatory, and that the
endorsement in question is not
sufficient compliance with the stat
ute. Therefore 1t is unnecessary
to discuss the other objections 10
this indictment.
Objection is made to the CON !
spiracy' Indictment, number 11,700: |
"(a) That the first count is
brought under sections 46 and Asa
of the criminal code.
"Cb) That said count uses the |
words 'Willfully' and 'wickedfy' in |