The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-06-03
NO NEW CITY LIMITS.
Supreme Court Decides Against
the Extension.
JUDGE LIcHTENeERo REVERSED.
One Fifsh Of the whole Number Of Free
holders Must Petition for
the Election.

The decision Of Judge Lichsenberg re-
quirins the county commissioners to hold
an election on the question OF extending
the corporate limits of the city of Seattle,
was reversed BY the supreme court sitting
in bank At Olympia yesterday. The de-
cision WAS handed down late yesterday
afternoon, and the following dispatch was
received from Olympia last evening by the
PosT-IxIELLIGEScER:
OLYMPIA Jane 2-The important case Of the
County Commissioners Of King County vs.
Griffith Davies and william D. Wood. appeliees.
for exsens Of the corporate lirni.z Of the city
OF Seattle. was decided today By the supreme
court in favor Of the county commissioners. the
court reversing the judgment Of the superior
cours OF King county. The supreme court holds
thas the law passed by the legislature February
%. 1855, under which the proceedings were held.
vas repealed by the subsequent law known rs the
general incorporation law approved March
n, 1890. and that for the purposes of annexation
the city council must call an election in the
city aud the territory to be annexed. and that
there must be . majority n each to effect an
nexation.
At the instance of the CharIber of COM
merce the city council endeayored to ex-
tend the city limits over large tracts lying
TO the north and south of the city, and
also Mercer island, making the city cover
about la square miles. The council pro-
ceeded under the act approved February
D. 1883. which requires the county COM
missioners. when city councils and twenty
five freeholders OF territory sought to he
annexed petition. to call an election in the
city and the territory sought to be an
nexed to determine whether the bound
aries shall be extended or not, and in the
election majority OF all of the votes cast
determines the question OF annexation.
The county commissioners, finding
that . large number of the residents
OF the district lying to the south of the city
in the territory sought to be annexed OBJ
iected to annexation. asked the opinion of
Prosecuting Attorney Carr in the mat
ter. He advised the board that the
act under which they were proceed
ing had been repealed by another
act approved March q, 1880. which
provided that the election shall be
called only when there was q petition pre-
sensed to the common council, signed by
one-fifth of the qualified electors of the
city, and that in the election the vote of
the city and territory should be counted
separately, and that q majority in both was
necessary to carry the question. Accord
ingly the county commissioners refused to
order the election.
Griffith Davies and Judge w. d. Wood
then applied to Judge Lichtenberg for
writ of mandate to compel the county COM
missioners to call the election, and after
argument the writ was granted, and the
court ordered the board to call the cleo
ton. The county commissioners appealed
from the order to the supreme court.
Colonel ]. c. Haines was retained by the
people living south Of the city to prosecute
the appeal, and he argued the case before
the entire court at Olympia last Saturday.
In the meantime the Chamber of Com
merce offered to pay the expenses
of an election in case the supreme court
decided il to be illegal and induced the
county commissioners to call an election,
which was set for June 5. The supreme
court, however. decided yesterday
that the act under which the county
commissioners were proceeding was
repealed by implication by the act
of March q, 1890: that the whole
proceedings are void and that no election
can be held. This finally settles the ques-
ton as it was presented to the courts. and
no election can be legally held. Whether
further action will be taken or not by those
interested cannot be said. To proceed to
attain the much-desired object it will be
necessary to present . petition to the city
council. signed by one-fifth of the electors
of the city, ami then hold an election, in
which the votes of the city and the terri
tory sought to be annexed must be counted
separately, and majority in both is neces-
sary to annexation.