The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-02-25
Jury Says His Work Was Author
lied by Commissioners.
JACOBS ExcoRlATEs THEM.
Denounees Methods by which County
Records. So Important to Every
Taxpayer. Have Been kepf-Noth-
ing to show That work Was Or
diet for 1891 80. bnt No Damages.

The jury In the case Of Robertson VS..
King county. brought IL q verdict yesteT-
day afternoon awarding Robertson $3.50
or the total amount Of his claims against
the county for work on the road district
over which he was formerly supervisor
Judge Jacobs charge - the jury con
tanned q severe rebuke TO the county COM
nisslonefs Oh the manner III which the
records Of the orlce have been kept and
said that II gave every chance for fraud
J. remains 10 be seen what the grand
jury viii do with the matter, which Il Is
cad. Wiz be taken gp by that body TO-
day. An aitemp; will probably be male
TO-DAY 20 demonstrate TO the grand jury
that tho county has been GefTauQed in
thai 4 great part Of the work was never
done. Prosecuting Attorney McElfoy
vii appeal the case 10 the supreme court.
where he expects 10 make a showing or
the legal points shat Will cause q rever-
sal
The sensation in the case yesterday was
Judge Jacobs charge TO the jury. Judge
Jacobs said
The last point in this case IS was Rob
srtson authorized 70 do this work. I am
ashamed 10 confess before thls Jury aud
my countrymen that the record Of the
transactions Of the board OF county com
misstoners Is IN the shape Il really is
shown 70 be b. the testimony. There IL
not the scratch Of the pen showing the
authorization OF road work except the
entry Of Resolutions as 10 how much the
various commissioners uere enfitied 10
spend on roads in Their sev ga' districts.
although the amount an spent Is
between $4,000 ard ss0,9o
THAT resolution ended the record
until the bii!s FOR completed work are pre-
sented Tor auditing
As citlzs % or the county and Judge az
the superior court am ashamed that such
things exist. The law affords the county
commissioners IA competent clerk bat they
do not seem to have taken advantage OF
IL. II the court held the law 20 be. as
thu prosecuting attorney says K IS that
the transactions Of the board OF commits.
sIoners. which should have been u record
could not be disprovsd by parole testimony
In the absence 81 that record. | should
have felt IL my duty 70 instruct the pruse-
cutting attorney 70 have brought action
against these commissioners for the entire
amount expended from the road fund Rut
tho court could not convince Itself that
Il was his duty 20 make that ruling and
not allow what the board has done 10 be
proven by parole testimony"
The jury was then Instructed tina; II they
found that the board had authorized the
work, even though In a very Irregular
manner the absence OF record dld not
stand IN the way ~ their finding for the
plaintiff.
Few witnesses were examined IN The case
yesterday and the pleading comme1cei
early. John +. norc male the argument
far Robertson ana Prosecuting Attorney
MeElroy appeared for the county The
case went 10 the Jury AZ : o'clock
The jury's verdict awarding Robertson
ssg % vas accompanied ~ answers 20
- interfogations prepared by Prosecuting
Attorney NcElroy There were seven
causes OF action and in each one the furg
. found that the commissioners had au-
Athcrized the work that Il had been done
and that Robertson should be paid A.
no showing was made to support the eta ~
81 damages. Robertson MS only allowed
the amoun; due for ordered work.