The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-01-12

'"The decision would not have seemed
more biased II the court had been hypno-
TIED by the capitalists on the other side
or the question"
On account Of the foregoing paragraph,
which appeared in a motion for rehear-
ing Of the case OF j. F. Judge ct al. VS..
the Bay Mill Company ct al. which was
filed yesterday with the clerk of the SUI
preme court. the supreme court yesterday
made an order directing the attorney gen.
eral to forthwith file a motion for the
Gisbarmen1 OF w. ID. Lambuth. a we'll
known attorney OF this city. BY the order
of the court, Lambuth is allowed ten
days. after service of notice. in which to
file an answer.
In October Attorney Lambuth brought
suit against the Bay Mil Company. OF
Ballard in behalf Of j. +. Judge and j.
r. Hetzier. two mill hands, for $3.50. AT
the same time he put lien on carload
Of shingles which was standing on the
railroad track within few feet of the
compaay's mill The Bay NH Company
did no: appear in The case. they had
already disposed of the shingles 10 Z. +.
Nieha.se. a Seattle shingle broker. 10
whom the railroad company had delivered
the oill OF iadiRs. Judge Moore. Of the
equity department OF the superior court,
after hearing the case, sustained the liens
and Nieharge appealed from this decision.
The supreme court held that the shin
giles should not be considered as having
been at the mill, as they had been deiv-
cred 10 the railroad company by the issu-
ance of a bill OF fading to Broker Me
barge after the mill company had sold
them. The court based it's decision on the
ground that. 10 hold that the shingles
were at the mill would be TO render the
business of buying ard selling shingles
uncertain and insecure. The case turned
on the meaning of the word ''at' used
IN the statute. To this decision Attor-
ney Lamhuth yesterday filed petition
for a rehearing of the case. in which was
included the paragraph 10 which the court
has taken such a decided exception.
Attorney Lamhuth was seen AZ his home
on Thirty-fourth avenue and East James
las, night and said:
I'm shingle eases the law gives a lien
while the shin2ies are at the mill and in
site the mill. Tire supreme court has sew
eral times upheld the lien claimants and
stated that the object of the legislature
in passing the statute was 10 favor and
protect the lahorer. Accordingly, when
the supreme court reversed Judge Moore's
decision / filed motion for rehearing. l
mailed the motion to the clerk Of the
court at Olympia on Saturday.
Being firmly convinced that the law
was intended To uphold such claim as
the one involved In this case ! earnestly
coutendcd In the petition for rehearing
that the court would reconsider the case.
Without intending any disrespect to the
court / may have used stronger Ian
guage than necessary. After sending the
petition nay attention was called to the
fact that the court was likely TO take
I exception 20 the paragraph which stated
that the action could not have appeared
more biased II the cour; had been hyp9o-
tized TX the capitalists on the other side
/ OF the question:
ON Monday ! wrote Il letter to the
clcrk of he supreme court asking that he
. strike that sentence from snY retiti0n
This letter evidently had not been re-
; ceivcd 81 the time The court took up the
petition The clerk had tho power 10 fot-
low ou' my instructions IN this matter
and proba ''ly would have done SO had he
/ received tho letter In time While asking
. fhc clerk "a strike out part of q petition
Is not customary proceeding Z has been
SuUe hy atterorNs number If times be-
fore. I thiuk shat e viii prove in this
ces" Sufficient evidence th9t no ofYense
was ruesut"