The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-12-24

ably and well, yesterday said TO q reporter
/ that he considered that the city's interests
| had been shamefully betrayed by the dis
Inissal in its name Of the Columbus street
Injunction To q Press reporter he gave
| succinct history of the case, winch brings
| out few points not stated by the Posi-
IxTEIIIG ExcEg yesterday. He said
have never known quite so outrageous and
| tlnt,stiiable an abandonment OF client cause
| as this appears 10 have been
The case involved primarily n difference OF
| two and half feet between the grade OF the old
| railroad companies at its crossing of Columbia
street, and the height at which the city had re- re-
| being retained. -
chiefly the question o. the eco eqpmPanies right to
Daring my short term as city attorney the de-
| PENDANTS twice attempted TO bring the case TO
final hearing. but each time / procured post
ponement because important witnesses for the
city were unayoidably absent.
so the case went over until Judge Jacobs came
into Office corporation counsel
He expressed TO me an intention when be
came into Office OF procuring authority from the
city council 10 retain me as special counsel Tor
the city 10 assist in the trial OF the case, as had
gained some familiarity with it. i was ont of
town from two days after Judge Jacobs term
began until the Sd OF November, and the case
had been set for November 5.
On my return found that Judge Jacobs had
made no arrangement for my being retained in
behalf of the city, and yet was depending on me
to take care OF ii, and was not III readiness Tor
trial himself
declined TO go into the trial with such an in
definite standing, accordingly assisted Judge
Jacobs TO secure postponement TO December .,
and expected 10 have nothing more to do with
the case. A few days before December Judge
Jacobs came 70 me and urged that i join with
him in trying the case for the city, although he
said as the council had an economical streak, he
could not ask for any retainer for me or agree 10
pay anything for my services.
faf. s,,&rr nf <1aanf fty
were involved and consented 10 assist in the
trial as volunteer counsel, as Judge Jacobs re-
quested
The case was brought toltrial on the 18th in
slant, and two days were consumed in tax ing
evidence, when the hearing of the arguments
was put over till yesterday. Yesterday morning
made the opening argument IN behalf OF the
city, and the points | chiefly relied on were as
follows:
First-1n July, 1889, when the city raised the
Columbia street grade two and one-half feet at
the point where the railroad track had crossed
II before the fire, the city possessed an absolute
and continuing power TO establish It's street
grades and change them at viii, and was not
trammclled at that time by any constitutional
provision requiring II TO compensate the owners
of property for damage caused by Il change OF
grade, prior 10 making the change
Secondhand the railroad companys fran
chise to build and maintain the "ram s-h0rn
track, granted in March, 1852, was and is void
on certain grounds of technical nature, which
it is not worth while to state to you at length,
but which were worthy of serious coDsid-
Grafton OF the court, and which were supported
by numerous authorities.
Third-That the railroads had taken their
franchise subject to the eitys control OF Its
streets and were obliged at any time to raise
their tracks above the wharf level If the city
should require them to do so.
There was fourth point in the case which the
city had always much relied on, namely, That
the ire TO abandon the ''ram s. horn" track and
go onto Railroad avenue, were estopped from
afterward claiming the right TO rebuild the
n had in ha
meantime raised and rebuilt Columbia street in
the faith of the promise of the companies to go
on Railroad avenue.
But at the trial on the 4th instant Judge
Jacobs had seen fit not to introduce any evidence
OF the facts supporting this estoppel.
When had finished my argument yesterday
left the courtroom at once, as | had done my
part in the case and had engagements elsewhere.
IL is impossible, OF course, 10 tell what the de-
eision of the court would have been had the
case been allowed to go on and been submitted
for Judgment; but have a strong impression
that the city would have won, and If it had not
Won in this court il could at least have been ap-
pealed to the supreme court; the city could have
kept the injunction in force in the meantime
by bond and before hearing in the supreme
court could have eDdeayored to procure legisla-
ton that would enable the city TO do away for
ever with the.objectionable ''ram's horn track.
The city has been rebuilding the part of Co
lumbia street IN question during the last two
weeks and, as heard two or three DAYS ago.
has lowered IL at the point OF the OLD track eros
sing, some twenty-five inches below the grade
inches higher than the grade at which the rail-
road companies claim the right TO cross the
street
mentioned this matter to Judge Jacobs yes
terday morning before the argument began and
asked him whether the reported change was
true and whether the city council or board of
public works had authorized it. He said it was
true that the city was rebuilding the street only
eight inches above the railroad grade, but that
there had been no official change OF grade
lately
II this ii true then either the city engineer or
the street commissioner or the corporation coun-
sci must have taken the responsibility of having
the street lowered in diregard OF the established
grade
What have stated to you is all 1 personally
know OF the matter, but / am credibly informed
that after left the court yesterday the argument
OF the defendants was begun, and proceeded
untl about midafternoon, when Judge Jacobs
interrupted Mr.. Burleigh in the course of his
argument with the remark that the RAILROAD
company had only to raise its track eight inches
quired whether the city would allow the rail-
roads 10 run their track across tolurn-
bia street ii they would raise it
eight inches above its old grade,
and that judge in. obs said that if they would
raise the tack that height they could run it
where they ID pleased; that the attorneys then
lett the court and went to Columbia street TO
look at the proposed crossing, aud conferred to-
gether, and then returned to court and
Judge Jacobs stipulated that the case OF the
quired Judge Jacobs TO put this stipulation into
writing and TO move formally for the dismissal
and that when Judge Jacobs had thus insisted
upon the dismissal OF the case, Judge Iitchten-
berg inquired:
Judge Jacobs replied:
:. The council be damned, l am the corpora
ton counsel"