Hide Article Text (OCR)
PART ONEFreedom Thousands Held In Texas Jails at Issue HereSEATTLE, W; The tlnv seed cthe air by ladle?CONTEND LAW UPHOLDS • REFUSAL TO PAY FINEAppeal Announced When County Court Judge Denies Habeas CorpusAlthough expressing “serious doubts*’ as to whether there la any authority given by Texas law to Imprison a person for failure to pay a fine Imposed It) county court. Judge C. M. McFarland of the county court at law here late Friday upheld the general practice of Imprisoning such persona and of allowing $1 per day for such jail service upon fines.His action was Inspired, he said, by a desire to pass up to the court of criminal appeals as speedily as possible a question Which may precipitate a condition of seriousness throughout Texas.Judge McFarland and Wayne Somerville, county attorney, expressed frank fear that the higher court must give a ruling which will leave most of the county courts of Texas without authority to Imprison in default of fines. Such a holding, they said, might make It necessary to release from various county jona In the state a total of several thousand prisoners now serving time** because of failure or Inability to pay fines, eighteen such persons are being held In the Wichita county Jail.If the condition la precipitated. It will be due to an apparent oversight, Judge McFarland said, when the last legislature amended article T93 of the criminal code of Texas.The Issue was precipitated Friday when Judge McFarland called mip for hearing an application for habeas corpus filed on behalf of Henry Rowley, a negro who, since February 16, has been nerving out a fine of $100 and costs imposed lota a charge of carrying a pistol.W The original application, filed by Mathis and Caldwell, local attorneys, contended that Rowley should he allowed $3 per dky for time served Instead of the $1 per day which has been allowed. Attorneys admitted that the county was privileged to utilise his labor In return for the $3 per day allowance, but thev contended that the county was obligated to provide, such wosfe.Bsss for Attack An amended petition, filed Just before the hearing started, questioned the entire theory of Imprisoning for failure to pay fines Imposed In county courts. The onlyslonarv society c odist fgplscopal entry Into the L former Nancy tie. now the Pri Indore, Asia, 1 qualities of a 1 It consideredfertile soil of i and then burst the ladles them* Whatever m* intention to ex the protest Is lt;nitely so.Thus did tb Coughlan, paste assurances folic Interview with president of the sionary group.“And,” said t everyone to kne action of the sc resent the view church In gener mv own, or tb iority of our m “It was a m cidenfc. to say t make assuranci the last of It.” President Drs Interviewers. } Ueved her socle cooperation of elgn missionary the former Sc; United States, i visit here.possibl^s^cptfop to that conten*ftlon, afmeys for Rowley agreed, would be fn the comparatively few counties wfjich have a means of utilizing county convict labor.The amended statute provides that a 51 per day allowance may he made for either work or service. The statute, before amendment. had made the allowance 58 per day. Judge McFarland's view is that the old statute .was entirely deprived of force by the amendment.The basis for the attack upon the amended statute, ea pointed to the attorneys, Is the closing clause which sets out that the provisions of the act shall not apply to counties not having “county farms.” By the term “county farm, Judge McFarland believes, the article clearly refers to a place where convict labor may be employed. Although Wichita county has a “county farm” It Is exclusively a place for the Indigent or for “pest” cases, he said, and is not equipped to handle labor. This point was testified to by }JL W. Nicholson, county judge.*' *dge McFarland and Mr. Somer-vlKJ said they have been unable to find any other statute except article 793 which provides Imprisonment for failure to pay county court fines. If the higher court should hold that the provisions of the act do not apply to counties without work farms, the officials further said. It will leave the county courts without any law under which Imprisonment for fine may be forced.Although Judge McFarland ordered that Rowley be returned to the custody of the sheriff, he directed that the accused man be allowed bond of 5200 pending the outcome of the appeal on the question. .....- -4- -■---------- -RUSTON. I4i sponse to a relt; cation Into th\ 1 Em at ion of Pr« niff of LouisI stltute. Dr. Gle a member of education, proi Icon, president that an SnvaPresident Co head of the clt; by the execul week on the c failed to eufoi Institution. T presented and at the termini scholastic ternAs an often tlon of Preside nice Nelson, the Institution, ter to the Moi she Intended t with the scho« present year “1 mony with th«lelea establish President Johi cause I believe principles and Interests of served.”Imu IN WALLS PETITION PRISON BOARD TO RETAIN CAPT. SPEER AS WARDENHUNTSVILLE. Texas, April T. lt;*) Five hundred prisoners In the walls here signed a petition and sent ItIn Pnl 57 W Ph1tav° rVdlpman nfLONDON. A ning News sa* Philippe, the lt;be married t Watson of V, London withlr(Rumors w month that Pr Watson had • ports were dt Paris by the mother of tk she said. Is j plane voyage goes weekly tc pervlse the plane).Miss Watso: an operation London but li vorably.The prince 1 began to ma the wedding t News, and Is particulars at Watson on i form which hThe prince His bride wa what older. I and has travel by airplane^ the noted fan and his motVvniln ry»*» id
Newspaper Details
Wichita Sunday Times and Record News
Wichita Falls, Texas, US
Sun, Apr 08, 1928
Page 27
Full Page
Clipped by
Becky T.
TX, USA 13 Jun 2017
Other Publications Near Wichita Falls, Texas
Wichita Falls Times Record News
Wichita Falls Times
Wichita Oil Reporter
Times Record News
Wichita Weekly Times
