The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-11-28
THE BENCH AND BAR.
They Discuss New Rules and a
Very Good Dinner.
\ QUESTION OF MAJORITY.
preliminary Debates-The Old Rules
and . New Set Of Regulations Sub
mitted-Banauet at Night.

Ihe convention Of the judges of the superior
court OF the state was opened yesterday in the
courtroom usually occupied by Judge Humes,
ana expectations as to the attendance were re-
ahzed. There were present, when Judge LIGHT
enoerg called the meeting TO order the following:
Judge J. \. Bloomfield aud George A. Stewart,
OF clark, skamania and Cowlitz: Judge j. w.
Robinson and I. v. Eddy, of Thurston; Judge
gan po,asi sna =; / oaton' OF Lincoln, okano,
George ID. seofeid, OF Mason and Chehalis;
Judge Z. b. Graves, oil Kittitas and Yakima; A.
Y, Mhatcom aud San Juan: Judge W. IL. Upton, OF
Walia Walla and Franklin; Judge J. G. McClin-
TON and Mr Lane. of Clallam; Judge Henry Nc
Bride, Of skagit and Island; Judge F. Allyn,
Judge T. Campbell. Judge John Beverly. Mr..
fogg, Mr.. Sharpstein and Mr.. Smell, of Pierce;
Jndge lichtenberg, Judge Humes, Judge Os-
DENNY, OF snohomish and Kitsap; A. Myers, of
kittitas and Yakima; NJ. NJ Goldman, OF Column
Ola, Garfield and Asopin.
On motion OF Judge Lichtenbsrg the conven-
ton called upon Judge w. II. Upton, of walla
"alia, to act as presiding officer After few
remarks on the object of the meeting, Judge
Robinson moved that Judge Graves act as secre-
tary OF the convention
When the preliminaries had been settled
Judge Lchtenberg read letter from Judge
Blake, in which he gave reasons for believing
that 1t was impossible to adopt uniform rules,
and that the code itself furnished all the regu-
lafions necessary. Judge Lichtenberg was dis
posed to controvert this, and said he had taken
the liberty OF asking Mr.. T. 4. Shepard, who
agreed with him, to draft a set of suggestive
rales
Mr.. Shepard being called upon, addressed the
convention. He said:
The judges of the superior courts of this
state, having been requested by call of the
HON. l. J. Lictenberg, OF King county, issued
pursuant to resolution passed at the conven-
ton OF the state bar held in Tacoma on August
q aud %, TO meet in this convention for the
purpose OF revising and formulating new rules,
and the resolution providing that one member
OF the bar from each county or judicial district
should be requested to confer with the super
Tor judges at this meeting: and l having been
selected by the judges in King county to join
IN such conference, at the suggestion of Judge
Lichtenberg, have been at some pains to form
ulate q proposed set of new general rules, which
may serve as basis or starting point for the
discussion of the subject that we all hope may
result in the adoption OF rules generally accept
aote arail OF the suggested rules is herewith
submitted TO the convention; but few prelimi-
nary remarks may not be out of place to indi-
cate the lines upon which these rules have been
framed He continued
Absolute uniformity OF practice in the superior
court throughout all the counties Of this state
Is impractlcable OF attainment This 10 freely
conceded by those who have been foremost in
urging the adoption OF a new set of general
rules. Such rules must admittedly be broad and
general rather than minute in their regulation
OF practice, and must leave the system sufficient
elasticity to allow OF its adaptation to the habits
aud needs of the various county juris dictions
and TO the different volumes of business and
corresponding facilities for dispatching 1t. do
not believe that any attempt should be made, by
general rules, to do more than very slightly to
guide or restrict the individual judges in the
control and management of their trial calendars.
But there are certain matters in the progress of
causes before they are ready for trial in which
the practice hitherto has been both vague and
varying throughout large part or the whole of
the state, to an extent that IL is easy to remedy
and that, while it stands as at present, is liable
to produce serious practical injustice The par
ticulars referred 10 are mainly those relating to
service OF papers, to the time to reply, amend
or plead over, to the hearing of motions and
demurrers and the giving of due OPP
at such hearings The rules that submit by
way OF suggestion provide a uniform mode of
service. a uniform length of time for various
pleadings and proceedings, a uniform motion
day, subject to the power of the court to pre-
scribe or order a different time for the hearing
OF any particular , matter and require lair no.
rer for hearing to be given either by actual SER
vice or by entry on bulletin or a motion
docket; leaving the court in each county free to
adopt either the plan OF constructive notice by
entry on a bulletin, as at present in King
county, or on motion docket, as at present in
Pierce county, or the plan of actual notice
prevalent in many other states, subject only to
the reservation that actual notice by service
must be given to an attorney residing In an
other county. This last requirement, il is SUBJ
mitted, is absolutely necessary for the protection
OF clients who choose, as they ought surely
be left free to choose. TO employ to represent
in their causes attorneys resident IN some other
county than that in which the cause is pending
Thus the proposed rules, it is hoped, If adopted
would produce minimum of disturbance or
change of the existing modes of practice in the
various counties, but would merely assimiate
them in their general underlying principles
For the rest the chief aim in this draft of rules
has been to reduce and simplify, by excluding
rigidly all matters that regulated by statute,
by grouping cognate matters in successive sec
tions OF a single rule dealing with the whole
sub fafN lob 49,
ing those rules In the logical order of their SUBJ
lects; aud to provide. If possible, against any
future attempts at repeal or modification of the
the various counties. The result of my attempt
10 frame set of proposed rules upon these
lines lines has been group OF only ten
sections, some OF them very brief and none of
them of great length, and dealing only with
matters OF practice that surely can be and
ought to be uniform throughout the state rig
idly prohibiting any attempt al different regua-
ton of those matters by special rules and at the
same time leaving full scope for the embodi-
meut OF the preferences of the several judges as
To other matters, not covered by these rules or
by statute, in such special rules as they may see
fit to adopt. These ten rules are believed to
cover ali those provisions for the existing gen.
eral rules in force in most OF the counties in the
state that fall within the scope above indicated,
can readily be shown by collating the exist
ing rules with these, sevcrally. They are re-
spectiully submitted for your consideration, in
the hope that they may at least assist you to
tRke up the CONSIDERATION anu utsSusslOu OF the
whole subject with definite aims in view.
On motion of Judge Allyn Mr. W. c. Sharp
stein read the present rules OF practice adopted
at Tacoma June y, 1890.
4 discussion took place as 10 the extent to
which the votes of the convention would govern
courts whose judges were not present, Judges
Graves, MeCliljon, Litchtenberg and Campbell
participating. Judge Campbell maintained that
II should be the sense of the meeting expressed
by resolution that rules accepted by this body
should govern all courts.
Judge Upton expressed the opinion that this
body had the power 10 promulgate rules for the
government of all the superior courts He drew