The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1921-11-28
And MeddIing in PickfOrd Di-
vOrce Should Be Last.
Attorney for Movie Star Files
Supreme Court Answer.
HE CALLS IT MEDDLING
Says State of Nevada Never
Gave Official Such Power.
Gavin McNab Declares Attorney
General Exceeds Duties.

Carson City. New, Nov. 2s.--Decla-
ration that the attempt of Attorney
General Leonard b Fowler of Ne
vada to set aside Mary Pickfords di-
vorce from Owen Moore. violate ev-
cry principle of institutional govern
ment." and sis the first of its kind
and should be the last" were made
by Miss. P.ckford's attorney, Gavin
McNab. San Francisco. in an answer
filed in the state supreme court here
today to Fowler's appeal from District
Judge Frank P. Langans ruling up
holding the decree.
Miss Pickford was granted a de-
cree of divorce at Minden, New.
March 20, 1920, by Judge Langan and
in short time married Douglas Fair
banks. Miss Pickford, Moore and
Fairbanks are motion picture stars.
Appealed to Supreme Court.
On April Is, 1920, Attorney General
Fowler filed an action at Minden ask
ing that the decree be set aside "in the
interests of state of Nevada. On June
Is, 1921, Judge Langan upheld the
decision and Fowler appealed to the
state supreme court.
McNab's conclusions reached in his
answer to the appeal follows in full
This case is without precedent and
jurisprudence.
TT is the first of its kind and
should be the last of its kind.
1T violates every principle CT in
stituttonal government.
1T is without warrant by the con-
stitution of Nevada, by statute by the
common law, or by judicial interpreta-
ton.
Official power and authority must
n Ia no
usurped.
NO language can be found in any
law that can be tortured into giving
excuse for this attitude of the attorney
general.
Such Powers Never Given.
eff Nevada had contemplated be-
coming a party in the form of plaintiff
or defendant. or plaintiff against
plaintiff and defendant in divorce or
any ether action, the state thru her
people or her legislature, would have
articulated her purpose.
'tIf Nevada had intended that her
established courts were not to be the
sole dispenser of justice but that the
attorney general was to be a super
court, overruling judicial determine
lions. disturbing the orderly admins
tration Of justice and harassing litl-
gants-it surely would have SO said.
1T is not thinkable that the people
of the state could allow any official to
be at large without legal restrictions,
free to constitute himself a bill of at
tainder as against any litigant.
The automatic principle Of repre-
sentative and orderly government is
that law shall have a uniform opera
ton. It cannot be delegated to any
official to make the law unto himself
and to select a victim for prejudice
or caprice That would be the end of
free government.
Never Attempted Before.
THAT no attorney general in the
long history of Nevada ever attempt
ed to exercise such powers should set
tie the fact of their non existence.
That the present attorney general
has selected but one victim for at
tempted extraordinary oppressive and
eccentric Interpretation and abuse or
power, amounting to persecution
argues against its existence even In
his judgment.
THE people of Nevada could not
have contemplated that it should be
left to the temper, prejudice or ca
price of any official whether the law
should, or should not be applied, nor
that he should confine the operation
of the law to one person alone merely
Aecause that person was famous.
'tNeEada has expressed herself in
her laws as to the authority of her
courts and the authority of other Of
ficials. She has given no power to at
torneys general such as the present
attorney general has invented. What
the people have not given to him, the
attorney general cannot appropriate
to himself.
THE recognition of that which the
people have not authorized would de-
moraIize and destroy judicial proceed
ure and end orderly government.
Act Is Unprecedented.
mo instance can be cited where
such an attempted seizure of author
ity has been tolerated by any Ameri-
can state, nor can any case be cited in
any country governed by the common
law.
1.-The substitution of government by
official prejudices and caprice for
government by law means oppression
and tyranny.
IN this Instance the court having
iurisdiction-to which court the peo-
pie and the state of Nevada had con-
fined their interest in the matter
has adjudicated the subject and has
discharged its duty to society.
mo appeal has been taken from
that judgment. No motion was made
by the court itself to set the judgment
aside.
1.-THE judgment is final.
Calls 1t Modelling.
THE gratuitous and meddlesome ac-
attempting to disturb the adjudication
of the court by this strange and in
congruous and anamolous proceeding,
is without precedent and without war
rant in law and against public policy
and We respectfully submit that it is
the duty of this honorable court to af-
firm the orders of the court below or
to dismiss the appeal if the orders
made are not appealable."