Richmond daily register. (Richmond, Madison County, Ky.) 1917-1978, 1922-04-22
Intense INTEREST
IN COURT DECISION
Affecting Constitutionality o.
New State Dry LAVAL
Local Cases Held Up

Oln. MS was done TO await &c
cision of the Court of Appeals ol
the constitutionality of the new
state prohibition law which ha
been attacked i'll the case of Ma
l. Lakes from this county. This i
the third postponement of severa
of these cases. They are pilins
up and when decision from the
states highest court comes, there
will be quite a docket to dispose
of.
An Associated Press story
from Frankfort today tells of the
wide interest all over the state
that this test suit has caused. The
a. p. dispatch says:
Frankfort, Ky, April 22-The
case Of Mat Lakes against Coun-
ty Judge John d. Goodloe, of
Madison county, in which Lakes
is testing the Rash-Gullion prohi-
bitten act, passed by the 1922
General Assembly, probably is at
tracing more attention than any
case filed in the tribunal in years.
Attorneys and officials in all parts
of the state have on file with
Clerk Roy B. Speck, requests for
kilograms and telephone messa-
ges telling them the decision Of
the court.
The latest development in the
case is the filing of a brief amicus
curae by a firm of Harlan attor-
neys. These attorneys charge
that the Rash-Gullion act violates
several sections Of the constitu-
ton of Kentucky and of the
Codes of Practice for the Ken
tucky courts.
Lakes III his action attacks the
constitutionality of the law which
gives county and magistrates
courts concurrent jurisdiction
with circuit courts in prohibition
law violations. The law alsoi
forbids possession OF liquor and
makes punishable with Jail SEN
fences. No defendant can getI
off, if convicted, with a fine alone. |
\ general demurrer to the &C
tion has been filed by Thomas N. /
McGregor, assistant attorney gen
eral, in which he declares that the
petition does not state cause
of action" A special demurrer
also filed by the Attnorcy General
challenges the jurisdiction OF the
Court of Appeals under the cir
cumstances. By agreement
Lakes attorneys were given to
April II to file their brief in the
case, but already have filed it and
the Attorney General was given !
until April %. \ temporary writ
of prohibition was issued BY |
Judge w. I. Settle on March q.
Attorneys for Lakes are r. c. |
Oldham and George Ross, of Rich !
mond and for the state Charles
l, Dawson, attorney general; Joe d,
p. Chenault, county attorney Of |
Madison county; former Cover
nor J. c. w. Beckham. of Louis !
vile, and Elwood Hamilton, of |
Louisville.
Snider and Adkins, a firm of !
Harlan attorneys, have filed
writ of amicus curae interceding
in behalf of Lakes. In the peti-
tion they allege that the Rash
Gullion act violates sections 50.
141, and 142 Of the constitution in
that they allege it destroys the
uniformity of jurisdiction of
courts. 1t also is alleged that it,
violates section 81 of the consti-
tuition in that ''it neither sets out.
re-enacts nor refers to section is
of the Criminal Code to which it
is clearly an amendment.
Section SO of the constitution
provides that the General Assem-
bly, shall not pass any local or
special acts regarding certain sub
jects including acts ito regulate
the jurisdiction or the practice or
the circuit courts of justice or the
rights, powers, duties or ompen-
sation of the officers thereof but
the practice in cirucit courts in
sessions may. by a
law, be made different
from the practice of circuit courts
held in terms" Section 142 states
that the jurisdiction of county
shall be uniform through
out the state and justice courts
shall have equal and uniform jur-
isdiction The Rash-Gullion act
attorneys claim, destroys this un-
iformity of jurisdiction.
The brief of Lakes attorneys,
which already have been filed,
states that the Court of Appeals
has previously held unconstitu-
tional any law that does not refer
to the general jurisdiction Of JUS