The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1894-02-03
THE MAYOR UPHELD.
Judge Langley Quashes the
Writ of Prohibition.
RENEWAL OF THE TRIAL TO-DAY.
Jesse Cochran and y. N. Wolfe Mast
Asswsr 20 the Charxss-A Fair
Hearing Promised by Ronald.

Judge Langley yesterday decided that
the mayor Is the only official authorized 20
try charges against an appointive officer
whose removal .'for cause" il contem-
plated. The decision was rendered in
writing and il . carefui review of the sita-
alton great number Of lawyers were in
sttendance. and Mayor Ronald was pres
ent for the purpose Of denying. if occasion
offered. the trufhfulness Of the allegations
made that be had ever promised. II assur-
ances we're given that his brother and
brother-in-iaw should be retained IN the
city's employ. he would withdraw the
charges against Wolfe and Cochran. There
vas no such opportunity afforded. how
ever. and the subject msy come up IN
new form.
The decision Of Judge Langley is as fol-
lows:
The defendant urges that this court has
no jurisdiction OF the person of the defend
ant, or of the subject matter OF the action.
Ii this position is correct the consideration
OF other points raised by the pieadings
and arguments wonld be wholly unneees-
sary, for without jurisdiction the court
could make no valid order. except TO qaash
and dismiss.
1.-The substance of REALTORS petition is,
fully 10 hear aad determine certain
charges preferred against them, but that
he Was 50 hostile TO and prejudiced against
relators personally as to incapaeitate him
for fair and dispassionate Consideration
Of such charges, and unless prevented by
the writ prayed for would wrongfuliy GUST
them OF their offices as members OF the
board of public works.
by section 2 article S.-'The mayor
shall see that all the laws and ordinances
in force in the CITY are faithfully executed
by section II. article XIX.-.Any APP
pointed officer may be removed by the
mayor for cause.
''Relators are in this class of officers.
Section IL. article ", provides That in
case of the absence OF the mayor from the
city. or il he be incapacisated from acting,
the president OF the board OF aldermen, or
IL he be absent or incapacitated. the presi-
dent OF the house OF delegates shall act as
mayor, and for the time being enjoy all
his powers
1T Is urged by counsel for REALTORS that
the hostility and prejudice OF the mayor
as set forth in the petition incapacitates
him within the meaning of section IL
from hearing and determining said
charges, and that as to this service the
prohibitiye order Of the court should APP
ply;
y
only restrained him from hearing the
charges, he would still remain mayor for
all other purposes. He can only abdicatc
the functions Of his Office by absence or
incapacity. In either event the president
of the board of aldermen. by operation Of
the charter, assumes these functions, and
for the time being he has all the powers Of
the mayor.
''Our charter nowhere provides for two
acting mayors at the sans time. l think
this word sincapacitated' as used in sec
ton IL can only refer TO the mayors in
ability to act, or to some such condition OF
that officer rs would be equivalent to his
absence before the president of the board
of aldermen could act at all.
While the mayor il present and able to
act do not well see bow he could surren-
der any of the powers or escape any of the
duties imposed upon him by the charter
and ordinances of the city, much less
share them with another.
THE charges must be heard by the
mayor II heard at all, and am clearly of
the opinion that this court has no power
TO stop such hearing for the reason Of his
alleged hostility TO the REALTORS.
1t may place the mayor IN a delicate
and unenviable position but the charter
has clothed him with the power, and he
must be the judge Of his duties. 1t was in
the power of the frecholders to make their
Ger, whether elective or appointed holds
his official tenure under the terms and
conditions OF that instrument, OF
which he had notice whenhe &C
certed Office. The charter makers
could have provided other and different
tribunals for the administration OF the af.
fairs of the city, but they have not done
so. and it is not for the court TO say
whether they acted wisely or unwisely in
the m after.
III the mayor goes wrong in the exer-
else OF his powers 20 the extent of remoy-
ing REALTORS from office without cause.
they have an adequate remedy by other
forms OF proceeding. This court so held
IN the case of Hebron vs.. Van Brocklln.
decided in July last. and set aside the pro-
ceedings OF tue mayor as not warranted by
any proper cause shown for removal. The
action - still pending on appeal 70 the
supreme court, but If this court was right
III its application of the law OF the remedy
70 that case REALTORS rights, if affected by
the mayors action, can be sought on the
same lines. Courts will not use the ex-
traordin-ry writ of prohibition to regulate
the conduct OF motives of public officers
unless such conduct is clearly in violation
of law and not then If other adequate
remedy exists.
Admitting the truth of REALTORS state
nents. as these motions do, | am clearly
ton in the premises or power TO gran. the
peTemptory srit prayed for
The motions 10 qaash and dismiss are
allowed.
These orders vii! also apply to case
No. 1854"
The trial of jesse Cochran and J. NJ.
Wolfe viii be renewed this morning a. 10
O'Clock. unless. which is very improbable.
some nsw decree for delay is conceived.
Mayor Ronald was asked by posr-Ix-
TEiliaEScER reporter If he had seen any
occasion TO change his purpose
mo. he answered. most emnhatical!y
10. ] viii surprise these people. | shal!
give them as fair and impartial hearing
as II is IN my power TO afford. Ii the
charges are proved / shall remove them
ii they are not, saall so declare"
II is said that the present plan is to
bring Gp about 800 witnesses for the de-
Tense so IS 10 proions The hearing