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

80 @w - ~~~ - a-xD-
u.-w~s~~x .=~s '~zssussps~w 60 .
ws~u - @~~s~~w ~s~ 60 &w-
m~
q -s~8mE mmWm0k ~~~r So
~wsm~~~~ 60 snnk@w 80
- @~ - - 60 ~ 60
49, $500 49,. =
sn1k $3.50 - - - ~s~m -
go - q - - o.
~A~ , @assu~~ ~z1w~ ~sS a.
s.sn~~wus@~ 90 s~~~~~ - s~s =. -.
80 s~~-~ ~u~s -s ss-ss ~~~ -
go ,a.~ esasszea~~a. ~Nmss -
s-s~-~auz~ z~v a.~~ - ~ -
au'~p~~& - - ~~s~w q go "A n
ns~wAs4 - $50 -p~s~~ . -
as-e-nazwa ~AAa ~-Ae~wx ssz~zss m.~m -
m@~w am~m q m-uk a. ~nw y -
as@~x zs~wm@ ~ -~za~~@.mH w So
-rs~s s~~ah-~-s~ o. s-~rs~~ses -
s--Ass& sz<~zss - s~.zHs~ &zx - -
b. eA~~~- - aag<x ~ g. .~a1 a. -
"a ~ pss@s- s~z..~@n ->+
&wn@g ~ ahw uuu~.x
k~-<s&z< 10 sr~--xAm~~ % pmsxn~
- - 600 49, ~&~& $500.
IN rz@s~ 81 ~r=1a g n<~ - .nx -
~&@ e-Sz ~nsr-m~xr q 90 - -
a~S<-sv 81 r~~~umx p-~w~~ sws -
prsrx. 80 rzn~rx.~ - gs-k eu~1
1rssa1 6w Lar T-a-- no 4 ~ sEs<rn=-s q
srrabs& rh- kss< q 7~~rrr. I'D 90 s~.as
- s~~~sssizAA< ~ s~z<s--. vel p--asw
fk< e.s~ .~s b. go sa vkszk - Aksk-
AT s~sAs 10 h< .~s Sek.s<,y sSsss<d z
sb~ VERY fsis< ~bss< rss<s - - -. -
~h~sh-r = harss or erv. and q ussS
s1eh tkinss lave rs-sed b-sv-~s - pr.
ti,<. the del. nlsas might have Q sieSs -
have The particular osr shase prirs -
sued Cor dsscrib-d in some wsy. - q -
be diHsrnc-d from others which might =
possible causes at action. In all ssch q.
s-s the court will he advised Of some M.
con by the details OF the motion fer ners
particularly ard will use its discretion !.
requiring il. This complaint might hav,
been purgrd Of lis vrrbiasr and legal co.,.
illusions. il the defendant had moved 10
chat effect and the court had concluded ,bse
the cause Of Justice would have Lrea
adorned thereby, but the defendant did
Aot uake the proper motion. and Lia d.
murrer was not the statute mode of attack,
And If the defendants objection was that
the complaint was not certain enough, he
equally mist"ok his r-lnedy which was by
motion of SEC. 10. for more specific ssa.sa
ment, or BY the demand Of sec. 6s for .
copy of the account sued on. We have
said that however faulty the complaint waS
it stood invuln"rab!e TO demurrer and u
the demurrer should have been ov.rrulpd.
1t is claimed that the bill Of exception does
not show that the demurrer fosnd in the
transcript is the one which was sustained.
The bill, shows, however,, that the COM
plant was held bad on some murrer. aud
because, being good, no demurrer should
have prevailed against It, such decision
was error. In the rest Of the argument w
will suppose, as we can do SO withous
prejudice 10 the defendant, that the dcmur.
Ter found in the transcript 10 the one which
was sustained.
The proper judgment on sustaining this
demurrer would have been that the COM
plant did not state facts sufficient to eop.s
stitutc a cause of action. What it was ID
this case We do not know but ~ the rec.
ord shows that the complaint was dis.
missed. We presume it was done becnuss
tho plaintiff not desiring 10 amend. chose
to stand or, fall by his complaint. The
plaintif would have been allowed to
amend; if ha had done SO. the defendant
might possibly have asked to continue. II
the amendment had but stated the sam.
cause of which the plaintiff has already
given due notice, the defendant woull have
had no ground to continue, and il differ.
-nt ore. then though he might have had
right 10 continue lie would have had none
to dismise. When def. ndant is actually
in court on sufficient notice there is no rea.
son in justice why a plsintiff who eaa-
state cause At all should by dismissalbs
to return at the expense Of new
service especially when We remember
that the court may secure honest endvavoF
by its imposition Of terms which, may in.
clud. costs. And in this CASE the d-fsnd-.
and had put the notice beyond question By
answer and by demurrer. either Of which
worked an appearance. In considering th"
action Of tn. court on this demurrer, the
further QUESTION arises, whether the d.
fcndaut who had answered should have
been allowed to demur six months there.
after. While acc. 81 provides that the o.
lection of unsulfici-nt fact-statsmsaa in ~
complaint shall not be waived BY failingss
demur. end the act At Janaary -. 1904.
provides that that objection may b nsds
1t any stage Il psoeeediaes. We = ~
think ihs sresisds justify . dsossvss sA:s
an answer. lfassisg Tie seses q ysse9'
ing the d~t-sdsua - fsild - Dake -
shjeesiss - - Pspr si.s - b -
psp-s nod e sejeesisg = thse ss,9S
as.<ly. . Asssws Cd HSvs - .s...
sh<s ~ 49, s-As : d-sise ~ sss ?
th~ vs~s~ sppGsse~ Il che 80 q =.
sssEs- Il = = - d.sng ID $50
A. - - - 49,. - nruuD