The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-12-04
A LAWYERS BATTLE.
Nations in the Election Contest
Are 0yerruled.
a NEW ONE COMES UP TO-DAY.
Jsdxe Laexfey overrsIss obteetisss 10
the Citations On Both sfass-Ihs
Mala Issue Raised.

yanter wili enter az appearance and "a
court will listen 90 argument on mosiof
10 strike from the complains in the case o
Gordon vs. Askafn.
Ia passing upon the Iegal suff1cisncT o
the citation and service to give iarssdio
ton 81 the person OF the defendant, judge
Langley said:
An inspection OF the citation will shov
that compsiance with this section ws'
obviously attempted by that officer. Bat
Was the citation duly issued. n prop@i
form ard substance. addressed 10 ths
PROPER officer and By BIN served and re
turned according 70 law9
"a citation differs IN many essentials
from 3 court summons in that the latter
Is addressed TO aud commands the defend
ant therein named 20 appear and answer,
while the former - addressed 10 the proper
court officer. whom the court requires 70
cite or nclify the supposed delinquent %
so appear The substantive matter OF =
Summons Is usually prescribed % lAw.
that OF citation by the order OF the
court. except wherein the Ia. otherwise
directs. A summons proper usually Gp-
pertains 10 actions 81 law. willis citations
are principally confined 10 probate, chan
Gerry and special statutory proceedings
The sUauons - arbitrary and performs
but one function the citation - elastic and
performs numerous functions that could
not be .oreseen or provided for BY any ar
bitYary form 81 writ.
These are bot some Of tue points OF
difference. while between the two wrlts ere
found many analogous features. Both
must issue from the court. attesEed by its
proper officer and ander the sea- Of the
court; both possess the elements OF notice
and tx definitely the time and place of
hearing or trial both should DO served by
~ # ~
court, both are process and have equal
jurisdictionai force.
''fn these distinctions and analogies /
employ the term court summons IS dis
tinguished from the statutory summons
now in use In this state and which Is not
strictly process within the ordinary legal
definitions Of the word and being limited
solely 10 civil actions and never TO special
proceedings u can have no application in
the consideration OF this motion.
"fhe most frequent resort to citation
proper under our law is found In probate
proceedings, and under that head 40 find
by section e4s. "a Hill, that Whenever
personal notice is required 10 be given 10
any party to q proceeding in matters Of
probate and no other mode of giving notice
Is prescri bed. it shall be by citation issued
from the court. signed by the clerk and
under the seal Of the court. directed 20 the
sheriff Of the proper county. requiring him
10 cite such person To appear before the
court or judge. as the case may be, at a
time and place TO be named in such cita-
ton. Ia the body OF the citation shall
be briefly stated the nature and character
OF the proceedings.
This complies substantially with the
legal definitions Of good citation.
Here Il will be seen that the Legislature
has used the word in the sense OF notice
az u - also used ia section 436. before re-
ferred TO. BY both sections the sheriff il
required to cite. viz: notify the person TO
be affected by the proceedings. and no COM
mand whatever Is addressed to the de-
PENDANT as in the case Of summons. and
in this respect its sufficiency cannot be
tested by the requirements OF the latter
viii.
This is not n citation, but q special
proceeding under the statute. and though
the parties 10 the contest are design ated as
piAintih and defendant and the writ in
onr part calls the proceeding an action,
stall II Is plain TO be seen that Ii is a close
attempt 10 follow the law relative 10 the
contest of ga election. think this is sub
stantially done. | think the citation is
substantially in good form. is addressed TO
the proper officer and contains q brief
statement of the nature and character of
the proceeding. IL was properly issued
nnuer the hand of the clerk aud seal of the
court and the shcrlfi's return thereon
shows II 70 have been duly served. Service
by cony delivered 70 the defendant in per
son Is certainly good personal service. In
deed. ! can conceive OF none better.
II think the defendant is we'll notified OF
this proceeding and is subject TO the iuris-
dietson of the court.
''rhe motion To auash the citation and
service Is denied"
The announcement Of the decision of the
IN
the small crowd in the court room and the
attorneys for Meyer. who were willing.
they said. 10 brush all technicalities aside
and 20 proceed at once To the trial strictly
upon the merits of the case, Owing 10 the
absence OF Mr.. haFleigh and Mr.. Plies,
who had business elsewhere. the eontinu-
ance was granted I'LL this morning.
A motion 70 strike from the allegations
az the complaint al reference 20 distin-
gushing marks was then made BY the at
tornsys for Askam. in which case the
pieadings are 80 arranged that The decision
81 the motion goes a. once to the subIsct
matter u the controversy. Every one Of
the iiS allegations charges that ballots
marked ia more than ore place Tor one
rominee were eoantsd. and the motion is
intended % settle the question n once.
TIE argument will begin a. 9. 80 o'elock.
and from the present outlook will LAST far
into to-day. Il Is thought that At least
seven speeches Nlli De made the counsel
In each OF the .hres cases having sirniaed
desire % address the court Argument
Will probably be opened by John r. Ham
phries, and speeches Wall also bs mad. tor
the motion, probably byWill IL. White and
Richard W40Sor. Ant against it hv Rova
Tallman. ". q. Car. Andrew +. Rur-
leigh and Arthur p Griffin. James Ham
Htoa Aew IS Will make the closing spe.-h
In continuing the case until TODAY
Judge Langley said that he would hear
tae Arguments. but whether be would de-
eide the motion Immediately or wait untn
the evidence should all - ia he could not
then tesi Ihs best evidence 81 the va;s-,'
intention as the bailo; boxes themselves
And there was no telling whAt eoutin-
ssueles misht arise IA the course Of the
hearing.
No one can 50 the present time predict
sitk any degree Of accuracy last how long
the trial Will last Judge Langley has
cleared his 60 eudAy. ana j. prepared -
give she contests bis undivided attention.
Tae clever housewife hads thas nothing
heies - ifappove her table better thsn pr
Prices Rak.ng Powder.