Rensselaer Semi-Weekly Republican, Volume 41, Number 48, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 2 March 1909 — T. J. McCOY MUST STAY IN PRISON [ARTICLE]

T. J. McCOY MUST STAY IN PRISON

Judge Tuthill Sustains Warden Reid and Rules That He Was Right in Denying Release of Former Rensselaer Banker

Judge H. B. Tutbill has rendered his written opinion in the case of McCoy vs. Reid, which was an action by Thomal J. McCoy, a convict, to secure his immediate release. Mr. McCoy was sent to prison under the law of. 1897, known as the indeterminate sentence law and his claim was that he was entitled to have his sentence reduced by good time as computed under the' old law of 1888. McCoy was represented by Haywood & Burnett and John F. McHugh, of Lafayette, and the attorneys for Warden Reid were J. F. Gallaher of this city, Osborn, McVey & Osborn, of Laporte. The case was argued in the superior court on last Saturday, Feb. 20, and elaborate briefs were filed with the judge in behalf of both parties. The claim of Warden Reid was that the indeterminate sentence law of 1897 repealed by implication the law of 1883 and that no convict sentenced under the indeterminate sentence law was entitled to have his term reduced by good behavior. If McCoy was credited with good time he was entitled to his liberty December 19, 1908. If not entitled to good time his term does not expire until June 19, 1909. Judge Tuthill rendered his decision today, filing an elaborate opinion in which the contention of Warden Reid is sustained. The opinion treats exhaustively of the doctrine of

repeals by implication and cites numerous decisions, of supreme court of ! Indiana and other states treating this subject. The final conclusion, of Judge Tuthill Is that the indeterminate sentence law of 1897 and the good tifee law of 1883 were both enacted for the same purpose and that tee latter law entirely superceded tee former and was intended by the legislature as a substitute for It and that a convict sentenced under the indeterminate sentence law of 1897 is not entitled to have his sentence reduced by credit for good time. He holdß further that McCoy should be held in prison by Warden Reid until June 19, 1909. Accordingly the order of court was entered to the effect that tee plaintiff, McCoy, be remanded to the custody of the warden. The plaintiff through his attorneys excepted to the ruling of the court and prayed an appeal to the supreme court. The appeal was granted and the cause will be presented to the supreme court as soon as possible, as both parties desire a prompt ruling by the higher courts in order that a question of such great importance may not be left in doubt The McCoy case is interesting by reason of the fact that not only McCoy’b freedom, but the freedom of a hundred other convicts reists on the same point If McCoy is entitled to good time, then the others are entitled to .good time. —Michigan City News. v '