Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1893-11-17
SUPREME COURT.
Several Matters of Interest Passed
Upon by the Higher Tribunal.

Inc applcatlon OF ScnOOl DISTRICT
No. 81 of Snohomish, which includes
the city of Everett, TO borrow $3j 900
OF the permanent school fund OF the
State, on bonds bearing 8 per cent.
per annum, being referred to the At
torney General by State Auditor
Grimes, he gave it has his opinion
that the loan could not be made, As
the State Constitution prohibits loans
from that fund to persons or corpora
tons, but that it might be invested in
State, county or municipal bonds.
Phil Skillman for the school district
brought mandamus proceedings to
compel the Auditor to issue the war.
rant. The Supreme Court decided
that the Attorney General was in err
ror and that school districts are mu-
nicipal corporations.
The full list of decisions rendered
Wednesday is at follows:
State ex rel. School District No. 81,
Snohomish county, vs.. State Auditor
ordered that the writ must issue.
Justice Hoyt dssents.
Charles F. Clough and Jay p.
Graves, copartners as Clough & Graves,
appellants, VS.. the City of Spokane, re-
spondent-Jl alignment affirmed. Chief
Justice Dunbar dissents.
Puget Sound & Chehalis Railroad
company, appellant, vs.. Louis p.
iOuellette, respondent, and Puget Sound
& Chehalis Railroad company, appel
liant, vs.. w. $. Elwell, respondent,
from Thurston county-Judgment re-
versed and cause remanded, with di-
rections to overrule the demurrer to
the complaint.
Tacoma Railway and Motor COM
pany, appellant, VS.. George A. Jen-
nings, respondent; from Pierce county
Judgment reversed and caused re-
manded with instructions to grant the
non-suit asked for by the appellant.
Dissenting opinions were filed as
follows:
BY Justices Stiles and Anders in
Columbia & Puget Sound Railroad
company, appellant. VS.. the city OF
Seattle, respondent.
BY Chief Justice Dunbar in William
S. Watts vs.. George E. Hart, etc.
J. Il. Long, appellant, vs.. G. A. Bill
ings ct al. respondents; from Thurs
ton county-Judgment affirmed.
First National Bank of Aberdeen, a
corporation, respondent, vs.. Julius
Andrews, ct al, appellants, and case
consolidated Herewith; from Chehalis
county-Judgment reversed and cause
remanded with instructions to ascer-
tain the amounts due on the respec-
tive notes and order pro rata appli-
cation thereon of the proceeds of the
nortgaged premises.
The case Of in re Antonio Bojar, re-
spondent, VS.. State of Washington, APP
pellant, was submitted on the briefs.
A very important point was raised
by James Hamilton Lewis, in the case
of State, respondent, vs.. c. w. Nord-
strom, appellant, who was tried in
King county for murder, convicted
and sentenced to death. Mr.. Lewis,
who appears for Nordstrom in the Su.
preme Court, among other points
raised question whether the law under
which appellant was convicted was in.
valid as it permitted him to be brought
to trial on information, under the en-
abling act by which the State was adj
mitted to the Union. The counsel in
sisted that the act of Congress admit
ting this State commanded that the
State Constitution should not be re-
pugnant to the Constitution of the
United States. That upon this agree
ment we were admitted to the Union.
That Notwithstanding this, the State
adopted a provision in its Constitution
permitting y man to be arraigned for
his life on an information filed by the
Prosecuting Attorney, while the Fed
eral Constitution prescribed that no
one should be brought to trial for a
felony except on indictment of Grand
Jury. Therefore the counsel insisted
that the Constitution of the State
wherein it conhicted with this Enab-
ling Act was void and imperative, and
all legislation under it permitting in
formations unconstitutional.
The Attorney General for the State
combatted this position, claiming that
the Federal Constitution only applied
to the Federal Courts and prosecutions
for offenses against the United States.
The court has the matter under All
/ visement.
The case of Herman Zelinsky, re-
spondent, vs.. James II. Price, appel
liant, was continued for the session
and ten days are given appellant in
which to supply sufficient records.
The case OF the Michigan Manufac-
turing Company, respondent. vs.. A.
X, Saunders, appellant, was dismissed.