The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-01-18
JUSTICE NOT WITH THE Law.
Severe Structures on Snohomish omciais
In BaIiinger's County Seat Dectsion.

Severe structures on SuouoAnss" ~
tn BaIiinger'a County Seat Decssion'
A copy of TIE decision Of Judge Bal
linger on the appeal of Snoho1lfsn from
the as-tic-a or tie board Of county COM
ulassIoners Of Snohynish county in or
derEnx The removal of the records to
Everett, was received in the city yes
fersiay and, while II is against Sroho-
rrash. it contains some severe comments
on the commissioners as we'll as on the
existing law IN regard to county seat
contests. The hearing was had on mo-
taons for supsrseSieas and 10 diS1sasS
the appeal. and Judge Ballinger's rul-
ing was as .osiows:
Can AN appeal be taken from an or
der If the board cf County commissioners
Declaring the result of an election for
removal of a counay sat, and the max
ing OF an order 70 that effect?
do the commissioners act in a judicial
or quasi judicial capacity in such pro
ceeiings?
''The statute is a special one relating
10 removal of county seats. and no a2-
peal is provided in the same for the
action OF either the canvassing board
or the board Of commissioners. The
oa.y provision in the law which may
be said 10 support such right is the
amendment to the general law, section
1856, Hills Code claws 1898. PIP. 291-e),
Allowing app<'l,s from decisions or or
dSss of the board.
THE case OF Parsneter VS.. Bourne. S
Wash, 81, holds tsssais the removal of a
county seat is a political question, and
ba3ongs to the legislative branch Of the
government: and the same view OF this
question is reaffirz1lsd in Hickey VS..
Williams, Wash. $40. The same con-
clusAoa is laid down by the supreme
court OF Indiana in Eosley VS.. Ackel-
naira (se Ind. SID, in which the follow
ing language occurs: We hold that
from a proceeding before the county
commissioners fer the removal of a
county sent there Is no appeal. That
body has posgsco- judicial jurisdiction
and power IN thssr respective counties
over this and similar questions, and We
think the legislature wisely left to its
final determine tioa this question CThis
latter clause may well be questioned.
In view of the proceedings in the case
at bari. And on rehearing, the court
further says: This ground upon which
our ruling is based is that this is spe-
cs.al proceeding. for a specified purpose,
based upon a special statute, which
gives TO right Of appeal: and, being a
special proceeding. il cannot be gov
ernsd by general statute, and that, con-
sequeatiy .1Es> right of appeal exists
The principles announced in these
cases seem IT, me 10 set forth the law
of this case before the court upon the
motion % dismiss the appeal.
The conclusion follows that the or
der OF the county board was not appeal
able. and the responsibility for such a
nefarious law rests with the legislature
/ will say here that have searched
In vain for ssgne rational and legal
ground by means of which the court
could seize hold of this matter and per
nit a full and fair disposition - this
question sought I'd be carried up on ap-
peal. have done this because OF the
record setting oSst aets on the part OF
certain public officers in absolute de-
fiance OF al law and Of any concern for
n doesn't obserea tiogROf official or moral
probsty. But the court finds its hands
tied by legislative acts which. IL II ig-
nured or oyc~thrsw. il woisid subject
Itself 10 like censure.
'sTfse appeal must be dismissed and
an order may be prepared 10 that ef-
feet. This. OF course. iisposes of the
ocher q,fcSs sens presented and argued
TO the court
The citizens Of Snohon1ish at once ap-
p,isi for and obtained an order tempo
rarity restraining the board OF county
commissioners from removing dhe county
seat and requiring them Ia show cause
on January -. why the order should
not he nfaEts permanent. 1t is sought
~ THIS manner n bring the same qees-
tsSns before the court wa5sh they could
no.. by appeal. ghe allegations on which
the restraining order was bassi setting
forth such irrACulaFfey and insafticiency
IN the Tpeceesilngs had before the beard
as ~ render the order removing the
county seat absolutely void. The a.
ieref irregularities date back to the
first action touching the question Of
submitting the question az removal TO
the voters. Such "a defects In the Pc
giti,n and IN form Of the ballots. as
well as frauautent conduct Of parties
I~,sraected vt:h the election and the can
vasssug of tbs returns. TIE final de-
termination ~ all thu questions in
volvesl ~ the contest may take several
months yet
The sIse Ea.rsre~ Ordnance.