The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1896-02-01
HooAsc DILL are tasteiess. mild, erec-
hsOOA > 4 IIlS tive All druggists &C.

other matter they sought 10 Introduce.
Judge Langley sad that the parties COM
ing before him seeking this injunction
stood before him solely as taxpayers Who
were asking an injunction on the ground
that an invalid charter might be adopted
from irregularities IN its publication This
was too remote a contingency TO justly
an Injunction. and therefore he denied the
application.
The first question the city council al It's
special meeting put 10 Corporation Coun-
sci Scott was as TO whether the publca-
ton Of the charter in a second newspaper,
at the exorbtant rates demanded, was alb
soiGteIy necessary TO fulfill the REQUIRE
ments Of the law. He had TO say that the
council could not do otherwise that the
charter must be published in two Rewspa-
pers, and for such work the council must
accept the second lowest Bidder. The bids
were then opened. and they Included, as
stated above, those of the Argus and the
Republican. n addition 10 the three dailles
The Argus and the Republican were both
weekly newspapers, and the question was
raised whether. If the Republican. neiny
the lowest bidder, obtained the contract,
and published the charter IN a special daily
issue for the required thirty days, II could
be properly construed as a daily newspa-
per under the law. Mr.. Cayton, the pro-
prsetor Of the Republican. was asked il his
newspaper was a daily, and he answered
terday as the Daily Republican.
II was best TO be sure. however. and Cor
porat.on Counsel Scott was asked IL the
contract could legally be gwen 70 news
paper not previously recognized as daily.
Mr. Scott stated his view of the case very
clearly. There was nothing in the law he
sad making it a necessity fhat the news
paper should be a daily previously, but II
must necessarily be for the tine, as the law
clearly intended the charter TO be published
in two newspapers daily for thirty days.
He cited his authorities for this, giving
similar cases in which the courts had sus-
fained the view Of the question that he had
EXPRESSED He then drew up an ordinance
which was passed by the board OF alder
men and az a further precaution. was
passed By the house. This awarded tie
contracts TO the Post-Intelligencer at
1852 %. and 10 the Republican at $3.50.
Here another excerpt from the account
in the Times Of the days proceedings
comes in handy:
ct II. Dempsey, manager OF the News,
and Col c. c. Lyon, had not, however.
been idle. and when IL was seen that the
Republican was 10 be given the second con-
tract. Mr.. Dempsey, who had been quietly
sitting In the lobby. slipped out. BY the
time the councilmen had bGttoned up their
coats and reached the streets the news was
spreading that they were to be restrained"
When the gentlemen named discovered
the turn affairs had taken, they al once
placed their case in the hands OF Attorney
r. T. Ronald. During the afternoon Judge
Langley wa interrupted in the hearing OF
another matter by an application for "A re-
straining order. lie signed II In chambers.
and a little later heard the parties TO the
case on a motion to grant permanent IN
junction. In addition TO the parties and
their counsel there were present City Clerk
Stewart and II. r. Cayton, publisher OF the
Republican
In the complaint IL was alleged that under
the act of 1895 the city council was bound
TO cause the proposed charter to be pub
lished In two daily newspapers. and thai
the awarding of the contract TO the Re-
publican had been done through fraud en-
the part OF the city IL was charged that
the award was OF no effect and the order
void, because. first. the Republican was
not daily newspaper. and had never been
issued as such. and secondly, that I had
no bid for the printing. and was
neither the lowest nor the best bid
der Notwithstanding the above facts,
Byron Phelps as mayor and Il. F.
Stewart as city clerk were about 10
execute a contract with the Republican,
and unless restrained would do so. To
award the contract, il was contendsd. was
a manifest error on the part Of the officials,
and an act not within the discretion con-
nded TO the city. The publication OF the
charter in the Republican could not he
such as was required by law. il would
wholly invalidate the new charter. would
breed endless turmoil and litigation. and
would Illegally east upon the taxpayer a
large and useless burden Of expense.
In support OF the award Editor Cayton
WAS placed on the stand. Re was shown a
copy Of the Daily Repp5ucau and ide1-
titled IL as his publication. lie was qucs-
| toned closely by counsel fOr each side. and
maintained his position that the paper.
having Just been changed from weekly 20
a daily issue was In the .ield 10 remain
daily for the present.
Other evidence showed that tho bid 90
the Republican was for 500 while That Ct
the News amounted 70 $aim and that of
the Times 10 s.. SS25o. and tha. the saving
20 the city II published 80 the Republican
would be SO $40 The ordinance passed by
| the city council provided FOR .ettinE the
| contract TO the Post-Intelligrncer and the
| Republican, two daily newspapers
MIR Ronald on behalf Of the News. cen
tended that the publication would he &c
| legal unless IL was inserted In daily which
| then bad an existence. and that thc pub
| lication Of the Republican would rot he
| such publication as the law required, he
cause the Republican had never iSsueI n
| daily paper and would cease 10 publish a
| daily paper after the expiration Of thirty
| DAYS.
| AffHffAtifn AiNf1SfA CNNkf argued that
| the Judgment Of the city council couI4 NOT
| be questioned hv the courts and that the
/ evidence showed that the Republican had
| issued daily and would commence. puhli-
| cation 81 the charter In its daily issue.
/ which complied with the law; that the in
| teuuou 81 the act was &c have the text OF
| the proposed charter published daily. so
that the voters would be Informed as 70
| whas 10 contained. that u the people from
whom all power was derived adnpfe3 the
charter Il would hec0rrp the constitution
| OF the city, So 20 speak ana that no person
would have any legal right % complain.
| either in dlrect attack uuon the charter.
Or in any coihtcTsi way. ana that the civ
/ thus saving 90 the overburdeued tax1.av-
/ ers $3saa.
/ Judge Langley. tn deciding the ease. hafs
| thaE the plaintiff had no STANDING. because
| X there vas any Doubt about th- rirht 20
/ The nj - demanded The Injunction sh1.-t4
! not ~ granted, that the city aid nor eNeaai
| its authority IA determining that tha Re-
| publican was q daily newspaper ard that
! u the people adopted the charter after Sil-h
| publication ig crald cot ~ attacked exsanf
| directly, and he was ~ the ou.n.au rba.
/ 81 the organic law vas adopted hv the a.,.
/ gle 20 coalf not DE- successfully resisted
/ He ~ fused 20 grant Ehr Injunction
/ 4
4