The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-08-08
BARBER DOHERTY TOO
Will Follow Mr.. Fawcett, OF
Tacoma, Into Private Life.
THE CHARTER NOT AMENDED.
Jgdge rrifchard Decides That Proper
Notice Was Not GIven-Mrs-
James McReavy Killed


panied - Commissioner Of Public Works
Thomas +. Dohersy and Civil Service
Commissioners Teafs. sanna and Richard
Bond. Secretary Icnaood Touiiuson. OF
the board, vii 60 also. These things Elll
0e oT0lgnt about ey the decision OF Judge
EF4tcnAzc rendered today ia the quo war
ranto s1lt brought by r. 3. Mullen. OF the
board Of public works. against Commits
ss8IseF Doaerty.
The decision, which was 6Isd this morn
Ing. created a sensation in city hall cir
eirs and among politicians gene-al4y,
coming so closely after the decision N
the Orr contest case
Thomas Doherty, who left barber shop
10 take lhe office Of commissioner OF pub
lie works. and whose life IN Office has not
been q bed OF roses, is the man most af-
fectsG by the decision. which only gives
him a chance OF making himself once
more al home behind chair IN his ton
serial establishment.
In deciding that The charter amend
menrs we've no. adopted Judge Pritchard
has followed closely the constitution OF
the state and the legislation on the sub
ject. The main difficulty was that Clerk
Snyth neglected 20 comply with the law
in posting notices OF the election for the
purpose OF amending the charter in the
various preclncts ten days prior 10 the
election.
OF the election as far as the charter
amendments are concerned were made by
Mr.. Mullen. but Judge Pritehard did not
consider them as OF such vital Importance
as the neglect of City Clerk Smyth. The
effect or the decision will be to throw out
OF once Commissioner Doherty and
the civil service commissioner. so that
when Mayor Orr takes hold of the eity's
affairs again he will have the power OF
appointing to Office all Of those who served
with MIN in the last administration.
In his decision Judge Pritchard said:
1.-The chief contention OF relator is that
the election in April. 1896. so far as 1t re-
lated to the adoption Of the amendments
then submitted. was void. because the no.
tice required by law and constitution OF
the state Of Washington were not com
piled with.
The constitutional provision relied upon
Is section 10 of article xI. relating to the
authority of cities Of &c. 900 inhabitants TO
frame. adopt and amend a charter for
their own government. The section re-
quires such proposed charter or amend
ments 10 be published in two daily papers
published in said city, for at least tatrty
days prior to the day OF submitting the
same TO the electors for their approval;
and then follows the following pr )yision:
All elections In this section auth Dried
shall only be had upon notice, which TO-
election and shall be given for at least ten
days before the day of election In all the
election districts of said city
THE legislature OF 1880 passed an en-
aiding act for the purpose of enforcing
the constitutional provision under consid-
Grafton. In section Of which Ii is provided
that after the last publication of such
proposed charter the legislative author
ity of such city shall. within five days
thereafter. provide for the submission
thereafter TO the qualified voters of said
city and shall for that purpose give at
least ten days notice in each election dis
triet OF said city by publishing such no.
tee in two daily newspapers published
In said city. and by causing the same TO
be posted at each OF the polling places In
the several election districts thereof, OF
an election, which notice shall specify
the object for which said election is
called
at is claimed by relRtor. and / believe
with sufficient reason. that this provision
applies to the submission OF amendments
TO the charter. as well as 10 that Of the
original charter Itself
The only notice given OF the election
held In April for the adoption or rejec-
ton OF the proposed amendments, was a
notice published In the official newspaper
and two other newspa pers. having gem
eral circulation In the CITY OF Tacoma
not sufficient IN form. and It never was
posted. nor was any notice whatsoever
posted in any election precinct in the
c4ty.
1T appears from the evidence and may
be found as fact. that II was made
known very generally throughout the city
that these proposed amendments were TO
he submitted 10 the voters a. the annual
municipal election In April Indeed. this
seems 10 have been given unusual notori-
ETY. BY reason or its discussion upon the
platform and the stump. and from the
pulpit. and generally upon the streets OF
ths city.
There Is no direct evidence that any
voter failed TO cast his vote by reason OF
a lack OF notice.
The twenty-one amendments referred 10
related 10 matters Of great importance 20
the city goverum snt. and were believed
TO be very important as tending towards
a substantial reduction OF expenses and
greater economy rs wen as partly IN the
city government generally. The city eo-n-
CT and tta various departments in The
city government evidently desotcd q great
deal - tima and labor 20 the preparation
OF these amendments ara their sHbm.s-
sion 10 the voters. The sn6n3mea,s hsve
all been declared adopted ana the whole
machinery OF the city government has been
ra-arranged ard Is now In operation upon
the liGes pointed out by taese amend
ments.
Being inclined 10 think that fair ex-
preston WIS given by tec voters % the
eltv iu reference TO these amendments e
Is believed that under tae circumstances
here outlined the court ogSAt MT % g e.
tirb existing conditions Or 20 overthrow
the will Of the peo1is IS thus manifested.
! unless for reasons OF the gravest char
stfer n taef. reasons TIA: are practically
tts3frmountable.
."The principal question = whether a
failure 20 post the notice required by The
constitution ant statute a bcve referred 20
! in any Of the election districts constitute
/ sarh trsuru1auntahle obstacle. Il Sc uni-
versaliy considered by she courts and by
the legal profession generally, that * Is
( absolutely unsafe 20 adopt any bus a
strict construction OF the constitutional
/ provision. and although It has oe@E fore
ialv ans eiogusn1lg arguei by Ire attor-
ueys fer respondent that the cons,lta-
! tIonaf provision IN question may be- con-
{ s-ruea 70 mean and signify nothing more
/ than = publication ~ notice gn news
paper - general circulation In al O. ths
J precincts. vet. after r.adlng again a15
/ again the language og that provision TAX "a
/ tn connection. as / thlnk IL sAoalt be, wsth
/ the earliest legislative construction there
I ~ ara being rse unnflnafal % the gaet
/ ajax the legislative construction Is f9ur1
4 in whaE &c known aS the era hllng act,
I 20 he.nE tAa organs aes O. eiiias %
/ $50 .EaAA.tEnts iH The state % HasHis' g
taa. 81 60 be deemed 81 itself some waat II
I are nature - a constitution, the "FtteT :
{ utterly unable 10 yield - thr srSc-1ss; -
: advances bv counsel fer respondent 50 "a
{ aeqaiesce Ia MS attempted ca0str'ietlaa
E 81 ths .er-taffrs-ffa- oar constitution EVIL