The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1922-05-06
TOWN NOT LIABLE
Kansas Mob Law Doesn't Pro-
tect Against FOOtpads..
Supreme Court Reverses Judg-
ment of WyandOtte Court.
TAKING A DRINK NOT A CRIME
Thomas County Tribunal Re-
Yersed-Defendant Discharged.
Oral A. Ray Must Serve Life
Sentence for Murder.
TAKING A DRINK NOT A CRIME


! declared today when it reversed a
! judgment of the wyandotte county
/ district court where ]. c. Sanger had
secured judgment for 1851 against
/ the city OF Kansas City. Kan.
Sanger was robbed as he entered
his place of business with pay roll
money which he had brought from
( bank. He brought suit against the
/ city for inadequate police protection
under the state mob act. A former
decision that three men constitute a
mob was quoted and the plaintiff re-
covered judgment. The judgment
was granted under a law to the effect
l that a city is liable for damages by
mob. The city appealed and the su-
preme court reversed the trial court.
Justices Burch and west diSSented-
( Justice West wrote lengthy opinion.
In the prevailing opinion, tho, it is
( held: The legislature did not intend
that any three men who deliberately
/ plan to commit murder, robbery, bur-
glary, arson or other felony and go
/ together to commit that crime should
constitute a mob. If the legislature
I Intended to accomplish that result
cities are responsible in damages for
much of the crime committed within
I their limits. Until the legislature spe-
| officially says that cities are liable in
damages for such crime when COM
/ mitted by three or more persons it
1
under such circumstances"
Bear Must Pay.
Sim Bear, former manager of the
I Bell Telephone company, in Topeka,
must pay his full share on notes given
by Topeka citizens who pledged their
credit to help the local Western
league baseball team six years ago. A
sum of money was borrowed from the
former German-American State bank
to aid the club. The CLUB lost money
/ n nd Of 6A Fnea 70
paid. Bear refused to make settle
ment.
He contended that settlement by
other persons of the full obligation
and also that he was not liable when
a new contract had been made with
the bank. The Shawnee county dis
4 trict court found for the bank and the
supreme court affirmed the judgment.
Won Block Bridge Plan.
! The Kansas supreme court defused
| orders under opinion handed down
/ in 1917 Officers of the Kaw valley
| drainage district in Wyandotte county
| failed in their efforts to hold up the
rebuilding of the Kansas City North
western bridge in Kansas City, Kan.
I The case has been before the courts
| nearly ten years.
Following the long drawn out liti-
| CATION the drainage board sought to
! enjoin the construction of a three
/ pier bridge in overhauling the North
western structure. The supreme
court held that granting of such
writ would be blocking its own orders
I made five years ago and refused to
/ approve the application. The case has
! been before the district court, state
! and United States supreme court and
/ has been reflected in legisfa tive pro-
| ceedings much of the time since the
1907 flood. The drainage board sought
| to prevent the placing of more than
one pier in the river.
The Missouri Pacific Is rebuilding
| the bridge and has been before both
/ state and United States courts and
/ the war department in its efforts to
secure approval of plans The case
| attracted wide attention in the kaw
! river district. 1t was contended by
more than one pier in the river would
/ act as a dam and cause danger from
/ flood waters and might result in
break thru dikes and levees.
| In its original decision in the case
l the supreme court held that the
( bridge should be reconstructed so the
/ floor line would be above the levee
/ line and authorized two piers. The
] decision came on an application for a
writ to compel building of a one pier
| structure. The railroad is preparing
! to reconstruct the bridge and the ap-
plication for an injunction was to deny
/ the road right to follow its present
! construction plans.
/ May Take a Drink Under Law.
Kansas with all her bone dry laws.
has not made the taking of a drink of
the other fellows whisky a crime.
That was the decision of the supreme
court when it reversed the Thomas
4 county district court and ordered Lu-
man E. Munson discharged under the
liquor law.
/ Munson was arrested charged with
violation of that section of the bone
dry law which makes it illegal to have
LIQUOR in a persons possession in Kan
sas Evidence showed Munson met a
friend The friend had bottle of
liquor He handed the bottle to Nun
son and invited him to take a drink
/ Munson was seemingly in reasonable
frame of mind and poured himself a
] generous drink. The county attorney
the brief period in which the bottle
was in Munson's possession. that he
violated the law The jury brought
in a verdict of guilty and Munson ap-
pealed- Justice Burch wrote the
opinion which declares the law doesn' [
punish for personal use Of intoxicating
LIQUOR except in street cars. inter
urbans and railroad trains.
Ray Gets Life Term.
The supreme court held that Oral
A Ray must serve a life sentence in
the penitentiary for the murder in
( May. 1913, of Clarence LeClerc- Ray
I had entered a plea of guilty and been
sentenced, when he began proceedings
in ceram nobis to secure his freedom.
His fight for liberty was based on the
claim that he had been induced to sign
/ a confession and plead guilty by rea-
son OF beaunss administered at the
tCorinued on Page ThreeJ