The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1888-10-28
Ms GEO. D. HILL CASES
-,svs BLUsDER IN sECURlse
raULrr INDICTMENTS.
-, Histsrv Exposing The Res-
- why Mr.. Ronald Did not
~..t . be Again a Candidate for
r,sseeufing Attorney.


The Democratic managers are basina
a. Efforts against the Republican
.s.d;dates for sheriff and prosecuting
s.so-ney upon trurnped up theory
ssounected with the Hill cases, and are
sssaming that these cases viii ego
!. -rour,s Il the Republicans are elected.
7, xiex OF statements recently made
NIT. Ronald and others it Il
..rtb While to review the history oil
- eszes with Mr.. RonaId's connec.
don With Them:
rxrounfy Treasurer George D. Hill was
..Sirsed for forgery and larceny at the
w rer,n last year, during Mr.. Ronald's
..rm Of once as prosecuting attorney.
sseordlng to the allegations Of the indict.
.ssr,r. The forgeries consisted Of alterations
80 ia the tressurer's record OF warrautz
= ,,r6xing figures to raise the amounts.
- ofher indictments charge larceny by
...h.r,Jement OF public funds, and were
1870 uuder section Sss OF the code II "A
Ss;rssd generally By the officials that II
~ lime Hill turned over the of7ce TO
srrtius there was an actual shortage OF
sSont $4,000, which, with interest,
ssonufed TO vi 600. 1t was also claimed
81 Hill had been guilty Of malfeasance
q ef;fe, By appfopriating this amount Of
s = 10 his own use and covering the
.isppropyiation by false entries In the
boskG
fsstcrgp UNDEK THE WRONG SECTION.
MIN Is guilty as alleged. he could have
been indicted under section 800 Of the
<sSr. This section Is specific provision Of
~ 10 punish public officers for misappro-
Eating public money or other ina1feas-
ssrre ii Office This section covers the
cksrres made against Hill while section
a nudef which RoEald's indictment was
obfsined, Is general provision common
a uao<f states, concerning what Is com
noply know as embezzlement, which the
eoufts have never held to include failure
al he part Of mere depository a. banker
and the county treasurer is considered In
~ 81 the county's banker to pay over
When called upon, q sum equal to the de-
POSTS received by him. The legislature
e framing this section does not seem to
have Intended It 70 cover such a case a.
fbaf AGAINST ar. Hill, and Il has been 50
decided time and time again In this terri
tory. It was decided by Judge Greene in
III, In the case Of the Territory against
DoWney, treasurer OF Pierce county. that Z
c0snty official could not be indicted and
punished under that section. This decis-
Ion was sustained b. Judge Iangford, In
TIE csxe OF the Territory vs.. Roach, late
treasurer OF Garfield county. Judge Tar
ner has also sustained this point Mr..
Hills attorneys claim that many Hathor-
Ties outside Of the territory have sustained
these decisions.
when called upon TO plead to the indict.
merits the defendant could have demurred
and raised the question, but II was deemed
s1yissbie not to do 30. Mr.. Hin said he
wanted a yindication and not a mere
acquittal, and was ready 10 20 to trial.
The cases, however, were not brought up
Tor trial until year after the indictments
we're found.
SERIOUS QUESTION.
At the last May term defendants attor.
asys casually remarked In court, when
Chief Justice Jones was inqulring as 10
The length OF time the trial would probably
consume, that they considered very brief
dine would be sufficient for the trial. "A
The indictments were bad. and that they
would object to the Introduction OF any
evidence under them. and expected that
ne cases would be decided on their objec-
ions 20 evidence. Thereupon Judge Jones
insisted that such questions should be pre-
sented TO the court before Jury was called
and said that he would set the cases down
ior argument on the question as 10 the sui.
nciency OF the indictments at some date
IN the future, which would give counsel
on both sides an opportunity for prepare.
uon, and, considering the circumstances
70 which Mr.. Ronald was placed, date
"a set ior argument giving him several
DONALD NOT READY.
When that time arrived, the arzumen,
was postponed at hr. Ronald's request, as
ae was not ready. The records show this.
he made excuses that other 1abors had
absorbed bis time, Then at the date OF
ne adjournment OF the argument Colonel
Haincs presented tho legal questions re-
aed upon by the defense, the principal
point being that the charges against Hin
were punishable II at all under section $50
and not section $50. under which the in
dictmanH were obtained.
RONALD BEGs FOR TINE.
NJ. Ronald, instead of answering,
pleaded that he was surprised at the
points sprung on him" in Colonel Haines'
argument and begged for time 10 study the
questions, which was granted After a
further delay OF two or three days. the
day arrived on which the cases had been
set down for trial. and Judge Jenes called
npon the attorneys to conclude the argu-
nent. Mr.. Ronald stated Ia open court
ne! owing to "the pressure of other
duties he had been unable TO
md any authorities TO sustain his
indictments and did not consider himself
able TO enlighten the court by argument.
ne concluded by proposing TO submit the
question without any argument on his
nae. This would have left the cases to BE-
decided and probably knocked OUT ON
ne defective indictments, without word
N defense OF them from the couniy's paid
attorney; TO this proposition Judge Jones
replied that be would not permit public
prosecutor to thus shirk his duty; that
ample time had been given Mr.. Ronald and
ne should have been. able TO make some
argument sustain the indictments which
asa peen prepared by him more than a
year previous. Judge Jones said, more
ever, that he considered the law points
aisea ny the defense very serious and that
&c would not decide them without hear
ing argument by some one IN behalf of the
territory. He thereupon made an order
suing the case for hearing on the law
Polnis raised on the FIRST day OF the sue.
seeding term OF court, and continued the
esse until that time Judge Jones died In
ne meantime and the ease will prob
sgly DC disposed OF AZ the February term.
NJ honaid peremptorliy declined TO be
seanaidafe for reelection, be also stated
M nc bad private reason for doing SO.
Ahhough he now denies this, there are n
aumoer OF witnesses who heard him say
,asI ne had private reason. with the
Ieumniation OF business, and the large
1aMuef Of persons in custody on criminal
Snalges whose trials will be entitled 10
precedence over those OF defendants ont
On na,f, a. Hin is. the I'm case cannot be
term.
Now In view OF this fact aud the peculiar
.atares OF the hin cases above noted, Is
s ssa, lair Inference that he Is aware that
.s'iute IN these eases Is probable and al
s,ost eertsin-regardless OF the question
shether Hill is guilty or not, aud because
~ ,ne hiunder in framing the indictments
NC mat he hopes to escape merited cen.
s ~. oy retiring and leaving the eases 20
a'aie IN the hands Of another officers
WHO pIo TUE WORK.
~ me civil cases on Mr.. Hilifs bonds the
SSeunty IN the FIRST place employed Judge
.SNls 10 assist In the prosecution and the
Pssainxs In the case were prepared under
as alfeetiou, The evidence was collated
saa arranged for trial by Mr.. Parsons. whe
vas constantly NJ Mr. konald's side pFoup
Ing MN during the trial before the referce
aohslds closing argument was prolonged
wseFal DAYS. ~ time killing scheme
salie Judge Bush was hunting up aathori
yes ios him. Tie got leave to reopen tbs
~ and uiler additional testimony "a
Seser . fatal emission and then cited &
fvat many authorities, Which had been
aehieu mp BY Nnsh, who IN fact hriefed tbs
vase for Ronald while he prolonged the
stEenent. For thisservice the county paid
nesa sSoe on K0nald's recommendation
IN ais representation that be bad been
.ssst nnprepsred, the defendants al
nsts having sprung points On him, that
1e was no; read up on.