Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1868-01-11

.-u.uaE .nn mna@@a~ .~zsa $500 ~a4swa~sre
- q s~=-zaaazn As~u u~-~~ "a "a @~
- = zuurzs sz=~m q issw en~N ~a&
..-u.ss~ 49, ww~~ sm< g-~rsA~am ss~
..sS.rsauas. .s4a.a~u~~ ~~~ aassus@@w W
- 81 -s-~z-z. Ts~ s~--~r~w
-. .oaas. 49, tmae z-~--~aAsx
-. 8 ~@s Ns~s So ~ u~~v ~ &~w
=. a--s as.-~4 sna ~a~S 80 a-zsusa~n1
-. ~Mr--2 20 wxeE b asp~ss p @-~~w
- sz-~resa~~ o. ~s--~ p~~gu-w~m . az~
- 49, 80 &--u=sws~ $500. @asu-,.ss
$50 49, u~-~~as~z $500 Ns -
- .suass.r-~saasss. swuzu-~ @@ sss
.s.rs.-rs - - - ~ ''-s's san
- ssxz r -a q 49, q ~ ss--uzas
- s-.-~s. aza aa.s --.~a.@ b. p-~~wa O.
- 81 a-rs-~4e g ~u~ - sa1~@
~ - ux -1-w - a-ww - -
u.--- ~ wum~ aa~ ~ ~ so sl-~~-~. Azua
- x.@nA@ xazzA Hazzx a .G@x a~<3
ra.zs- ~@x ~ Ezzs~@-
49, -n=~ ~ ~v = sa< sr~~s ~
aAx- sz--m 49, ru@rAswr xs~s~s
- ~ suzrs 80 ~ @z4- 80
- So --.~ -Ts- &C., - 1zxs
wsu~~-.~u- - sh- szurr - -rr a. sas'u&t
10 $3.50 u - ~ r~u~-% % GO
Ezr va. ~ cuzFaz4.s e=r- - ss-
G>ras s-Ers-as o. eazz-xssss< cszs- 81 E'rraua
100 sA~ srz1~r-.nE uzss sy~cHts say =
Ss~s ss<. - Inc gresn&s e stg~ctsss s.S
N. s-assas VIZ Il ssIls i:hIa 'Ax; easzsr-
rss ssssenr-uis ~hich III. party woald al
e. % the eosrt in sHPFpEi Of ha denHr-
Ter are the grounds Of ms o jee;ion TO the
complaint. and the sGb>tane. o. these 10
VIA, his demurrer should " spc if," ss for
example ,hxt il did not aver notice. or de-
mand. or delivery. or compliance with come
condition precedent, or such other fact
omitted aud requisite to make complaint
eooj. II the defendant has a good ground
tor Objection. this requirement of spccifi-
cation imposes no karisLip. and the plain
tiff heing advised by defendants sp-rifca-
tiuu rather than his arguments tl,cr on that
his com; .laint is insufficient, may move
promptly if he has good cause, get it
ready for adjudication.
Therefor. because this demurrer not be.
ing specific enough should have been dis
regarded i. was further error to sustain it.
When this com; laint was dismissed the
attachment founded upon it was also dis
solved. A writ Of error was at once taken
out by the plaintiff, and the cause brought
to this court. The appeal on its being
perfected restored the case and its attend.
ant taclrment to he condition in which
il was before the erroneous decisions COM
planned Of There was an in erval during
which the attachment stOtd dissolved. anu
the a,tache property discharged. II du-
ring that intrrvala transfe: We're per ect~d
10 bona file rcnlee, his title would b.
unques;ioncd and such property thereby
placed beyond the contingencies of any
appeal; but if the interest OF the plaintiff
remained unchanged, tho appeal restored
the attachment to all It's encumbering ef-
fciency. 3d..
III. conclusions we have come TO regard.
ing the question discussed herein are main
" based on the meaning and interest Of our
practice act itself. which introduces sys-
TEN capable of receiving TO illustration
from the books on common law pleading.
1t is rigorous protest united in by US
with nearly half the States, and even with
the English people Themselves. against the
illogical and mischirvous inp-dinents
which lal 40 intertw ined themselves
around adjective law, as to make the pur-
suit Of justice ridiculous'y uncertain and
shamefully expensive. 1t is syslem but
studied in its own utterances and best nh
dvrs.ood form its declared and known pur.
poses, and yet during the dozen years in
which it has presided over the practice Of
many of tho States there have been sewers
al decisions sustaining the principles here
inanao,,pcsd. Participating in the fortune
Of all reforms it has had to struggle with
ignorance. bigotry and prejudice with the
natural disinclinaiion Of stiff jointed fogy-
ism, to abandon its frmal crutchrs; with
tho natural loathness Of those skilled in
legal l-grrdrmain to forego its lucrative
and brilliant success, yet it is everywhere
affirming popular acceptance and the later
deeisioRs are mainly made in its interest.
With such decisions. which are literally
cited in all the late books on the new
practice, we think the conclusions We have
herein attaiued are in full accord and yet
We forbear quoting them. for the system a.
We have said is rather to be studied in its
wholen ness. even for the comprehension Of
its detail. than from few even friendly but
diseonneeted decisions on its parts. Be-
sidrs the act is also our legislative protect
sgainst legal slight-of hand. aud We must
eestSibpis our part also. ia conscientious
dslsseoee 70 the legislative gill % 10 I" lib.
sssny esssssue" is aecasdiag to The Con-
osoa Il sse. 81. - that in the avosei
psspsss II section 50. '' sub-ssaiisl Justice
.,y ~ ds~r besseea the psrti~..-
ISs rsl.es a The e.srs s~ls~ ere fhsrs-
t~s rvsvss-d. ard tn csa-- r-nss1rd o ~
Ass.s vssk IA cszfarzsiss -lEA shl. sysniss
DA2wIN. J~srsx.
C~sxsEs ks&1,s "a Ne III