The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-12-14
Judge Moore Will Rule on Motion
to Dismiss January Z.
i4orLEoAl sArTLeTorHe LAST
RIaantiTs Attorneys Oaer - Defesa
. Sstt for Divorce and Recovery
of Property In Case Present Ae-
saen II Dssassssed-Dore and Rom
Substance Of Ciosfag Argu1ents.

y
and NJ. the parties defendant, witnesses,
counsel and the curious spectators who
have filed Judge MeoSe's court room since
the beg4nning OK she trial VIII have 10 wait
until January T. lxs. before they will
E,inw how the court has decided the most
Important question that has yet been
raised In the herring Of the action. Yes
fertlay the forenoon sas consumed BY At
torneys Shepard, Ronald and Dore in clos
Ing the arguments an the motion of cosn-
rel for the plaintiff to dismiss the whole
action. At the end OF the forensic com
fiict. which was as hotiy waxed as sny ia
sate court history in this county. the judge
announced that ne would eongider the mo-
tiou and authorities cited in support OF
p.afnftfY's application and would announce
q ruling January Z, 1853
Tne opinion, which Was widespread, that
Judge Moore would rule or the case imfne-
diateiy upon the end Of the arguments.
heightened interest In the court proceed-
in2s I'm the case yesterday. Every seat IN
the room was filed, and several people
stood In the corridor outside. Not WORD
Of the arguments made BY the attorneys
was lost by the curious thxpng. or ln1eel,
by the parties themselves. ns Dir. Ronald
IN nreutorian tones delivered arguments
or read from authorities TO sustain his
position, Mrs. Van A3stine glanced IN ms
direction now with apparent questioning
and again with apprehension in her eyes.
These sometimes solght the stoIid face Of
her husband az IL she wished to read his
inner mind. With thoughtful faces the At
forneys for Mrs Van Aistine followed their
antagonists In every stage OF the aTsu-
ments, as IL mentally pt.ing mp amniu-
milton with which to demciixn the xTue~
ture raised against them. Meauwhtle tAe
eager multitude In the court room drunk
in every word. WAS interested in The clos
Ing tilt bet ween MIR. Dore and Mr.. Ronald
aad guessed as to winch way the e1ustb
Eaect ef Disssssss.
There Is much speculation among tfsnAk
who have watched the case from The be-
ginning as to what effect dismissal ataoum
have At ms s'as age, q ,as e
sought by Mrs Van AlssineS attorneys In
asking the court 10 throw the whsle case.
compA.nt and connter-hill. atfidayiss, n,o-
atiens ard all out OF court. Mr.. Dore yes-
terday challenged the attorneys for the dee
PENDANT 10 show wherein tssey would be In
Jured IL the motion 10 dismiss wers grant
I'D lie declared that they We're al liberty
10 Immediately begin suit for aunulmenf Of
The marriage OF the br.lfgFoain on tue
ground az conspiracy. u they alleged II:
that they would be able TO secure recourse
In suit al law for the recovery of the
property ri question, and even II that did
not saslsfy them they could carry the case
against TIE accused co-defendanis into the
erinina. department OF the court.
NO harm done?" interjeetei Mr.. Ronald
M Mr.. pare said the defendant would not
money!?
This sally. however, d.d no, discomfort
Mr.. Dore. who proceeded With all n.s force
10 demonstrate to the court the strength Of
hts portion. Finally he said that II the
case we're dismissed and Van Alsfine
hrnaght suit fnF arnuiment Of the mar
Rage and for the recovery of the property
claimed, the wife would not seek 10 avoid
the issue. bat would answer and defend the
suits
Mr. Shepard began the proceedings yes
terday morning BY concluding his arEn~
ment. begun on the day previous, in sup
port az the motion to dismiss. TIE tables
deep with volumes OF LEGAL literature and
" sdoIn. and these were continually brought
Into play by the attorneys for both sides.
80 that the court WAS kept fairly busy jos-
ting DOWN the authorities cited. Many NJ
the Eastern and Southern states were re-
eofted To hy the attorneys for Van Alstine
Tor authorities against the motion The SUI
preruc court of this state and the ruling not
long ago made by Judge Moore mseif
formed the main reliance Of the attarnsSs
for Mrs. Van Aiziine.
Legal Hattie Is Renewed
After AR Shepard finished. Mr.. Ronald
took up the course OF argument for the
Tie sought to show tina, the general rule as
10 assmissals I'D not apply to divorce cases.
and claimed that the defendant having o.
tanned q vested right in the cas-, by his
cross- bill. 10 which the plaintiff had an
swsred. should net be siecssd from ,se
court by motion 10 dismiss
II matters little ID the defendant wheth4
er this motion ts granted or not Mr. Dor.
SAID IN closing fhs Ncrjy controversy '.Tf,.,
defendant can AT any time after this motion
= granted bring suit for annIifnrnt OF
marriage, cVi action Tor the recovery o.
the property W. claims. afi can even carry
the charge of conspiracy nto The crimins;
courts AGAINST the defendants Standing
here az this time ani sI5eaklnr fnr th,s
yiaiutiu. say thar II such suit Is brought
We VIII come into court ard defend il NOT
Claiming that they have no right to hiring i
III comes With POOR grace from my
Brother Ronald - combat this motion an
sr eiectng myself and Mr. Slispard fror,
this very court on a similar ln4tIas, :, "a
fhsn year ago. He has evidently forgot
ssn, toe. the case of HeFrick vx Nissy re-
ported IN ;ha XVI. Washington sys wh sh
tiis SuNrHsffs court practically affirmed
these ether cases. Matte va Wlnrata ana
Scnsersiis VI. Johnson I"
MI. Ron7la unteFFuatlagf~ hut the SAL
n,vnummmnuwww~.