The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1897-10-07

were concerned. szch q p-0-zse was t7s
cnlT ere sszfHeisrE. jet many ether things
E12gas - heiG cut a. irdEcez=4ss oesscSs
mere premises. Es erew ar efez1ez- Pee
tire GO 3 trusting. csnE&snr. ElzpIs-hszrs-
&C. pxrs-n1zae8 girl Ereeiiny with love
sz1 revers-rs &r-8gzEtng slr.0ss &c ado
fz19a, a. Ire feat u her spiritual adviser.
believing tn hin. regarding his wer&s SIS
ala1ost zee wcr1 CO God, ard yer tad ~
bin thzt their guilty. secret wzs rot
wTurg
villa rsss1tiszs logic Judge jacobs drew
him hack 70 the restrictions Imposed ty
ire cc1rt- Take away al promise of
nzzrTiage. Tor wAte1 UcSc9y coEte16s q
tbs case" said shs eourt. "trsn take
Say a. aetz save these which tend 70
sEetfs tss passioEsrs nature ard what
have yoz isftT' This Mr. Hart sn5sAw-
orsd 20 ro11- CIT Al another stage cf
rs argument Judge J&cobs called oz hfn
70 3ei1t cur ~ differences between the
prescott case and that cssss frcrs The Tenth
NszhEngtoa- NJ. Hart pointed out that
IN that case TIE victim was mere Co.
En@stlss II ms case sns vas a member Of
tie aoEssaoa1 and treated as enc Of the
fantsy; T. that case she young girl had
resisted By placing barriers against her
bed room deer. ara, In fact had rever
co1ssstsa. but had been ogsr7awerec. n
tfass ease the girl Fad yielded throush Ter
love Tor her hefraysr and ker co1aGepre
n hSn. IN th&t ease ire man occupied
no special relationship fl life toward shs
gtFii IL this ease she mar was virtually
guardian, and the girl was his ward.
IN mat case IRE Hzan had his work and
sphere among the common ayecztlors In
NE n this case TIE accused man was
minister % the gospel. whose church The
ya9nE Esrl attended, and 20 whom xhe
LOOKED tor Spiritual guidance with all the
oins SsnsFa1Ion V hich woman feels in
matters where religion Is concerned
Judge HuEss made TIE closing arrt,--S-,
n support % the motion for dismissal.
AtfeT passing compliment % Judge
n1mnar&&s argument ard reference y,
ne faets ssnsAagly, that Judge jacobs had
Already Rad The na9a-argue9 decision Ia
the Tenth Washington "prayerfzIiy.' a
tribute which aweke an answering sr1sIe
ron the bench. Judge Humss addressed
hlfn1~is - The question IN hand with his
USUAL sncssive torcs lie rf9tcuIes the poss-
ton thai one law shaui3 De zeted o., 10
preacher and another 10 other rnsa.
quoted the tarss statement watch Judge
Jacobs himself had made as 10 he limits
within wsich the case muss be decided
ard sad: The eour. Is hsre, as your
honor very wei knows. net % make lass.
but 20 administer them. Here n this d.
e2s5on Is the isw 9f the state as Inter-
pFefe6 by oar highest judicial tribunal
Surely this csse must be tried IN Accord
anee With that 6sctsior. II II Is not. Is II
likely that thar court VIII decide oua
case one way ard another os similar na-
tuFs IN another way2 Here ia this statute
Is the last expression et the IaS.slatfva
mind. sEa b. & your hsnor must Be
guided"
The nFst thing In order this morning VIII
Be Judge jacobs ruling on th@ motion .or
dismissal which he took un4er advise
Tisnt when court adjourned last night. II
hs should grant the motion. es course
thar wfll end TIE case. II ne should aenv
y The defense VIII az once begin l,s evil
6ence