The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1927-07-16
Dale's Parole

II
Unless Governor Jackson changes his mind
George Dale will not serve ninety days at the penal
farm for criticsing Judge Clarence Dearth of Mum
Gle and grand jury in Dearthls court
Dale is to be paroled. Not pardoned, but paroed.
He must go to the prison gate undergo the hui
Initiation of being listed prisoner, go through
the formates of entrance to the place where boot
eggers petty thieves wife heaters and Migrants are
taught the ways of good citizenship.
He will not, so it is announced, be actually con-
fined Instead for the next ninety days he will re-
port to the prison authorities his actions. They
have the power to bring him back to prison. He is
merely trusted with his own freedom as long as he
Hdoes not Offend
= What would Dale have to do to violate the terms
, of his parole?
z The answer is easy .
Dale during the next ninety days, is apparently
under bond not to tell the truth about the Dearth
court.
AS long as he is silent tells lies about 1t. he
should be safe. If he speaks the truth, logically, at
least he should go back to the penal farm.
For 1t has been demonstrated that the ofense OF
Dale was that he told the truth about the Dearth
court.
Four years ago Dale, editor of weekly paper at
Muncie printed lot of things concerning the court
Of Judge Clarence Dearth and grand jury
The jury had just indicted him charge of
violating the liquor law, the claim being that he was
> In an Office where man, known to have been
axer and Trainer for the Ku-Klux Klan had bottle
of whisky.
Dale said that the jury hand picked and was
influenced by the Khan and drawn without regard to
the law.
:, He charged that the government of his city was
in the control Of invisible power, super govern
nent which had no regard for the constitution and
the law.
Dale was sentenced for contempt of court. The
indictment the liquor charge was dropped by the
prosecutor almost Immediately. Dale could not get
q trial on that charge
The Supreme Court of this State said that the
truth made little difference. Judge Dearth was
Technically within his rights when he sentenced Dale
. Things have happened since that time. The chief
event, as far as Dale was concerned, the i'm
parchment trial Of Judge Dearth before the State
Senate this spring
The House of Representatives by vote of SO to l.
said Dearth should be npeached. Ninety-three rep
resentatves voted to charge hi mwith deliberately
rnisusing his powers of Office to suppress Dae's
paper.
Ninety-t three men voted to charge him with so
conducting the drawing of juries to make it i'm
possible for citizens to get justice in his court
And when they had listened to the evidence,
sthirty-two Senators said he guilty Only seven
teen said that he should remain upon the bench.
But he stuck for it requires twothrds Of the Senate
to impeach and there lacking two votes to
accomplish that.
That Dale had told the truth the basis of
the appeal to the Governor to set aside the sentence
to send him to Jail.
There should have been prompt open pardon
for Dale, not the tinnid, huniliating parole.
What is the purpose of forcing Dale to report his
conduct to, the prison trustees?
Paroles are given on the theory that those con-
victed will not commit the same offense for which
they were sentenced
Under the circumstances the parole means some
thing than merely giving Dale his freedom
It Is challenge to every newspaper in the State.
Can 1t be possible that Dale is given conditional
liberty only because in Jail he would bring to public
attention the full facts of his and of the State?
The newspaper editors of this State who have re-
spect for their profession should unite in demand
that there be not parole, but FULL generous par
don as an admission that his sentence unjust and
unwarranted the edict Of tyranny and not the voice
Of justice.
An editor under parole for telling the truth?
Monstrous.