The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1890-09-06

p.opie Is tneir assent 20 rhe things we have
$50, namely: The proposition of voting. the
'sus OF bonds. and not of the derallS The an
.noiity 20 sell. 40 stated in the case OF the sp-
pea. o. wneisn, the authority to sell 10 q separ-
..c ano distinct power from the power TO issue
an IN all OF the cases cited that power to
sen was restricted TO sell at par.
- our views, therefore, are correct that
tne restriction in the ordinance is not applica-
ols. mat IL IL simply advisory snd the council
sfe NOT bound. il necessarily follows that Il las
10 applcaton: on the contrsrs section OF the
az. OF March Is. 1890 which gives the power TO
Ell. does not restrict that power as in other
sts'es the authorities of which have been cited.
because In al of these statutes the power to sell
.essficteo to not below par But, the vital
goestion, as we take il, and the one that we have
oeFoted as much attention to as the time would
permit after the argument last night, and one
Hnien We think counsel from their argumen,
seemingly concede. is as 20 the issue of the
ponds. the date of their issue
On me questions we have already passed
upon, especially the FIRST, second and third we
nave no the slightest doubt. AS to the question
OF Issuing bonds be ow par, We have some
uonos, bat not sufficient doubt that will alter
tne couciusion we have reached But UPON the
point that we are now discussing namely: The
GATE OF the Issue. we meet with q verY grave
question In our miad. We readily can see. "a
cOHuSef, 4
the council has the power TO anteda,e date for
one Cay. they have power to antedste il for one
month, and following that they might for many
months We are inclined TO believe that the
oate OF Issue is from the date the
bonds are authorized by ordinance; that
thAt Is the date. We incline to that
belief That being so, ordinarily we would issue
atemporary injunction, because all that is nec-
essary 10 an application for a temporary injunc-
uoa is prims facie case, and while this is an
application for temporary injunction. 1t has
gone further. that is. we doubt whether any
other testimony or different state OF facts would
De produced before US on final hearing The
OBJECT OF temporary injunction is to restrain
the acts complained Of pending final hearing
and adjudication OF the case There can be
no question that Ii a temporary inJunefion
should issue now, the credit of this city might
tufier. and assuming, as we have said before
that IL is the d. sire, and 1t has been 90 stated
that IL is the desire OF the plaintiffs not to have
the credit of the city suffer more than il has al
READY suffered. nothing would be gained by
temporary injunction excep, that the bonds
saou not issue Therefore ii the city enters
into stipulation. as the city's representatives
have stated the city would. that these bonds
shall not issue until the supreme court of this
state has passed upon the question now
before us-their decision being the only
binding one-the object OF the tenn
porsry injunction viii be accomplished with
out further injuring the credit of the city, IL
saeh injury has air ady been done. For these
reasons, the conclusion we have COM to is IN
deny the application for the Temporary irjuue.
ton. provided that the city will enter into a
stipulation not 10 !ssue these bonds until the
meeting OF the supreme court of this state at the
first session. whether special or regular
This viii give the parties an opportunity of
having the supreme court speedily pass upon
the questions involved"
VALIDITY OF STREET FRANCHISE
The hearing OF the application for a tempo
rary injunction made by Eliza ]. Starr against
the Wes' Street & North End Electric Railway
Company was begun in the afternoon. tenn
rosaFy orjer restra ming he company from pro-
Gee ling with the construction OF the road in
West street fronting the plaintiffs warehouses
was granted last week. Green d Turner
appeared for the plaintiff and George Donworth
conducted the case of the corporation. The
plaintiffs attorneys fight 10 made principally
against the validity OF the fran ehiss under
which the company is working. The claim is
made that the ordinance granting the franchise
was passed by the council during the absence
of Mayor Moran and signed by D. E. Durie, act
ing mayor, and is therefore illegal. The hear
ing win be concluded Monday afternoon
A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
Judge Lehtenberg granted a temporary re-
straining order forbidding Dexter Horton d Co.
TO sell goods purcbeset OF the North Seattle
Lumber Manufacturing Company, upon
which execution had been issued. The applica-
ton Tor an iniuoctie n was made by J. z. Fox
who obtained the execution against the CON-
pfny. Before IL was served, however, a bill OF
sale OF the property was made To xter::Horton
d Co. The hearing is set for september 10.
MAX KRINGLEs FAITHLEss WIFE
Max Kringle. the Front street liquor dealer
whose wiie's rec mt elopment with Fritz Hubert
ind abduction OF their child Elsie. were related
in the PosT-ISTELIIGEScER, yesterday fled a
suit for divorce. The complaint alleges the
facts of the elopment aud also that the fraii
vile was living in open adultery for two weeks
or more before her flight Hubert was Kringles
barkeeper and confidential friend, and en-
ployed their con idential relations to ems mare
the wife of his benefactor She has possession
OF their child, which the plaintiff prays for the
custody of. aad her whereabouts are stlll IN.
known.
IN THE CRIMINAL DEPARTMENT
C. G. Campbell was acquitted by the jury of
the charge of grand Larceny, in taking from
Pesquuls 0rroya's bureau box and pure con-
tainiLg $500 in cash last June Campbell and
Pesquule, Mexican harlot, had be, n living to-
gether on King street. The defendant Claimed
that the money taken by him belonged 10 them
both, and he took IL to keep until Pesqaula be-
came sober.
Prosecuting Attorney E. VI. Carr has begun q
war the proiessio al jurymen who iafest
the courthouse. He has sworn out warrant
for the arrest OF NJ. c. Quinn, a we'll known
peer. for importuning the officers 70 be placed
upon tn jury. This is misdemesnor, punish
able by fine OF $500. Mr.. Carr states that he
has lounged about the courthouse for the past
six months or more, boring every officer who
has anything TO do with the drawing OF jaries.
Attorney I. NJ Mcnamara has flied a motion
for q new trial o J. T. Riley. convicted OF rob-
berry. The motion alleges that F. s. Stevens
one of the jurors is not q citz-n. Joseph
Oakly. Rile' partner. who was arraigned with
him. We iound not guilty upon the Same test.
mons If another Jury.
MISCELLANEOUS FILISGs.
Paul Riecker filed a complaint against Mary
Riecker 10 whom ne was MARI. ed in lsSS in Los
Angeles pray ng for a divorce on the ground of
desertion. The plaintiff alleges that he was
abandoned by his spouse on the day of their
w dding
J. ". Mays fleda suit against Sheriff.. H.
McGraw for the recovery Of two homes taken
under execution, issued by the superior court
OF Columbia county. The plaintiff claims this
property was exempt from execution.
:. q q Gump VS.. Queen City Furniture Com
pany. Suit for sl2l
Alexander Maitland VS. Ralph S Hopkins
Suit for $50. Appealed from Justice Miller's
decision; final judgment for the plaintiff
Lake shore Lumber Company vs. Seattle Elec-
tric Railway ana Power Company. Suit for
AGA
Emanuel c. Weaver and shupe Tressler &
Lark VS.. West Coast Fire IL Marine Insurance
Company. Suit for sS75 on an Insurance policy.
THE ALKI LIBELLEn
The Almond Phillips Foundry Company fled
libel against the steamer Alkt IN claim OF
$50 for repairs made last June.
A-
THE BLOTTER.