The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1892-05-10
THE PUISNE COURT.
Charges Against Hebron and
Rinehart Tried.
THE MAYOR IN THREE ROLES.
Judge, Jury and Prosecutor in One
Made-Hearing Resumed To-day.

Republican members of the board of pub
lie works. George III. Hebron and VIII
liam Y. Rinehart, preferred by the mayor,
began yesterday morning and lasted all
day. The jurisdiction of the mayor was
demurred to, but overruled by him. Evil
dence was taken 10 show the truth of the
charges against Major Rinehart, but moth
ing new transpired, and his case was
closed. The mayor will give written de-
cision. Today Mr. Heilbron's case will be
taken mp.
The large chamber of the house of dele
gates was packed all day with a gathering
apparently of all classes, including many
whose names are well known in politics.
Commissioners Rinehart, Hebron and
Cochran were present, together with Secre-
tary Holbrock. Mayor Ronald presided.
City Clerk Stoneman keeping the minutes.
w. V. Rinehart was represented by Hon.
Orange Jacobs and Hon. w. Lair Hill,
and the city by Corporation Counsel Don
worth and f. +. Blaine. It was stated
that A. +. Burleigh would appear
for Mr.. Hebron, but was then engaged in
court.
Immediately upon the opening of the
proceedings the following demurrer was
filed by counsel for Major Rinehart:
The mayor of the city of Seattle to W. V.
Rinehart, member OF the bogri of public works
of the city OF Seattle.
The respondent comes by his attorneys, Will
lam Lair Hill and o. Jacobs, and excerpts and
demurs 10 the first allegation of cause, in the
first charge herein, Oh the ground that the same
does not constitute cause under the charter OF
the city or the laws of the state. That the
mayor, before whom the respondent is cited TO
and no power To hear and determine what is
cause, and because said frat charge, the mayor
being the accuser, has power to hear and
decide and determine as to its existence.
In answer 10 charge second, defendant ex
cepts and demurs TO the same, because the
mayor possesses no judicial power. hence has no
right to hear and determine the game, and be-
cause the mayor is the aecusor herein and can
not hear, try and determine his own eccusa-
tons.
After little preliminary skirmishing
between counsel Judge Jacobs was afforded
an opening to speak.
Mr. Jacobs said no did not know how to al
dress this tribunal. He called attention to the
provisions OF the charter under which the pro-
ceediugs were held and other provisions of the
same character in order to contrast them for the
purpose of ascertaining what is cause He, al
considerable length, proceeded to show by citing
authorities that any proceedings contemplated
by this charter must be of a judicial character.
He quoted Dillon and Pickering and referred to
% Michigan in support OF the proposition that
an express constitutional provision was neces-
sary to vest judicial power in the executive.
The mayor asked: suppose the mayor is
clothed with judicial powers by the charter; is
he not bound to follow it?'
Mr.. Jacobs didn't suppose he was bound
like young bird to hold open his mouth
II
it. Ii he could show that this tribunal
possesses no judicial power will this tri-
hunal in discharge of sworn and delicate
duty disregard its convictions2 He re-
membered that the commission had at
tempted to cothe municipal court with
the judicial power of the state. but the
supreme court had declared that only the
state legislature could vest judicial power.
If the charter could not do it directly
could il indirectly invest executive officers
with judicial power? The mayor possesses
no judicial power, and there is no state
ment of cause in the first charge. He adj
mitted that there was in the second, but
if 1T were true it ought TO be sufficient to
send the offender to the penitentiary.
Mr.. Jacobs then took up the matter OF
insurance: he pointed out that the charter
required that the official should not be IN
terested in the contract itself He re-
garded it as a fundamental principle of
law that corporation was as distinct in
its rights and duties rs private individu-
al-just as broadly separated from share
holder as one individual from another.
He quoted Boone TO show that "the indi-
vidual shareholder is lost in the corpora
tion-an individual eorporator may sue
the corporation" and VICE versa. The
charter provision is "any interest in the
contract" Could Mr.. Rinehart institute
any suit on that contract? Would he
have any standing in a court of equity on
that contract? He then turned TO the
point that if Mr.. Rinehart had y direct
interest in the contract if there were no
expenses connected with the business
il would be less than 81, ana no court Of
equity would regard such a charge. Yet
here 1t Is alleged rs a cause for the removal
of man from office. He quoted authori-
ties TO show that stockholders had no in
tercst in a corporation until dividends
were declared. The charter did not saw
there should be no interest in indirect
profits. but that there should be no inter
est in the contract.
He then took up the subject OF "cause'
and quoted authorities 10 show that the
cause must be general, substantial. re,-
sonablc. just Courts have held tha,
cause" must amount to an unfitness-to
n wilful neglect of duty. He reminded
the mayor that so DESTROYS had the ac-
cused been u avoid error that he had
asked the official legal adviser of the cor
roration and had received the opinion
unworthy though the adviser NAV hava
heen-that il was rot a transsression. He
asked the mayor If he thought that this
ottense carried with il the idea of in,en-
t}onal, wjuful wrong. a. corruption. of i'm
morality. II this misseasance; is this mai.
fcasance9
Mr., Jacobs asked Il it WAS intended hv
the charter that every man Of nuhIi,
spirit, of enterprise. Of a desire Ia n~o-
mote domestic enterprise. who shopl5
contribute $25 70 the cnc0urare,n,r- ~
local institutions should be barred ero,,
holding any office in the city government,
lie denied ii. and SAID eve~vtb:nc i,,3;.
Gated thar the intention was "a rrnhih;.
any interest IN furnishing 81 sarr,lieS an
materials, as Was very clearly declared j.,
other parts OF the charter ono moro ,ge,,-
cate point and he had done. Il was .
mystery - him, knowing the sense ~
honor OF the mayor as lawyer. that he
should formulate charges ami Sit ~ a
judge - try those charges himself 1t was
tie first time in tire history Of any pre-
;ealed 3ldicia. proceeding yhat the man
who formulated tho charges should 81 in
Judgment. He believed the mayor. when
nc had looked into the matter more
closely, would sec the lndelicacy Of his
position. 1t does not alleviate The matter
THAI he was invited 10 30 il by some com
mltteo. lie WAS aot bound - obey.