The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1895-02-01


As Gives Mis versssn 81 sAs Wtw,s.
Ousas outt.
In me ce3ebrNted txunk enser az Mar
Wtuzpf VI John Dunne ek al 81 q Ha~r.
land. Justice q the peace In F,zseon pre-
c11ot. yesterday made 4 motion 20 recall
me execution ard vacate the tununeut
maze By Judge Osborn On weduxseiay.
souge Osborn nzalde an order staying the
PROCEEDINGS Until . hearinx can Be- I'D.
Justice Howtand has written = ief1er
20 me Post-Infe5zigencer. IN watch he
says:
II - true tse case OF wimux et Al ".
Ds1nkn ct a. was trsea before ma ON
January H. 1sos and gave 1udxroent for
the psalnkifns iE the action srsd a.. facts
0ecsoscd at the trial were: Wfmpf ard
we had boarded % lodEed with Dunno
ana wAe. and when they sought 70 re-
move 1aseir TRUNKS and contents the
Dnnnss Chained the right to hold che
ssa1as nnder the Kan nv for hotel neep-
ers.
"A suit followed In Judge ca.awelrs
court. where tae DUNES recovered a
personal judgment against the Wimpfs
nor about 50. and afterwards execution
was issSed ard placed In the hands OF
q consrabie to make this Sxnount out of
property Belonging to the Wiupfs not ex-
enUt from executton. 1t was sworn to
before me by Mrs. Dunno and set up I'M
der oath IN the answer fiIed in the case
that the constable, Mr.. king, had levied
upon the trunks and contents and was
proceeding TO sell the same 70 satisfy the
5udgmsnt- This was false, because six
days afterwards Mr.. Cotton, from Du-
wamayh precinct. under an execution from
my court, lAvied upon the property, which
be found in the possession Of Dune and
wife.
! did not try Or seek to try the case
presented % Judge Caldwell. only found
from the facts before ma and the law
sh0wn me. that by reason OF Dunno and
wffe taking q personal Judgment against
the Wimpfs and suing out execution to
collect the eanse. they had wasFed their
right to hold The property under the hen
as hotel keepers. ALI Tho property UNI
der question was exempt. The law seems
to me clear that the lien WAS lost and
win,pf and wife were entitled to ssaetr
property.
Now. an regard to the abaoluse rule
commanding me to provide transcript:
4 wish to say that the Judge made the
order upon the affidavit Of John dunno
alone. The statement made by Dunno
was that would not provide transcript
upon tender OF my fees. This was false
aad every material allegation made by
Dunno in his aflidavit deny. I was
served by the sheriff with the rule. I
obeyed the rule: In fact. had q transcript
ready to deliver TO Mr.. Dunno for more
than week before the rule was obtained
and offered It to him upon payment OF
fees for Ming papers. approving bond and
making transcript. ! knew was not In
default IN the matter and supposed the
matter was ended when the transcript
was delivered. but the other night I was
called upon by the sheriff, saying he had
an execution against me for SIC costs
The order as signed by Judge Osborn pro-
vtded for the payment OF no costs and the
rule served on me called for none. Upon
looking into the costs claimed against me
find that the attorney for the DUNES,
J. 7. Ronald, has in his claim for $40 for
attorneys fee. As to where he gets the
law or right 10 charge me with such a
fee I am not Informed
Judge Osborn this morning upon show
ing made that / had never been heard by
the court, ordered the execution with
drawn from the hands OF the sheriff and
set the matter down for final determine
tkon on February Q. 1885"