The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1898-05-08
p.fn,ee 70 Amend the Information
n the Palmer Larceny Case.
.e,soNsR GIVEN HER LIsEaTY.
s.l~e Jacobs ConcIaSss Thsf sne
rYesecuting Attorneys once hA'
a. night to staad Upon tine oris
-, s,sorm.tfon aad Appeal q"
-. state suprens COurt-As Al
,esea Misearrtags 81 Sos''ce'

Shs pasusr grand larceny case anu tne
....ssons aver wisieh Judge Jacobs ana
Prosecuting Attorney McEiroy ana as
A.uut.es disagreed, viii go to the supreme
....~, lar 4 decision setting the law -
a. .rsosmations n such cases Meanwhile
tho Palmer woman. whom the police re-
..rd a one Of The cieverest Of her kind,
= 1. ubsrty 30 60. Ike the winds OF
h~eyen. vhsre she iiststh. unrest.ained by
-. fxwfai authorities. She was
deshasxsd yesterday by Judge JACOBS.
when Asslstant Prosecutor Hart told
tne court tina; the state would rest
Il, case on the information and carry the
mater TO the supreme court rather than
amend the Information.
tbs u The legal status OK the case. II
Il maintained by some people that there
has been . miscarriage OF justice. The
ps;sce department worked up the case
AGAINST the Palmer woman. hoping 10
make an example Of her as a representa-
tive Of class Of people who fiocked In
numbers 10 the Northwest. following The
uza OF the Klondlke army to the gold
fs;<s OF Alaska During the height OK ths
rusA the police were cverrun with cases
Of . similar character as that against
Georgia Palmer.
The court and the prosecuting attor-
rey's of1cs disagreed over the question AZ
70 the manner In which the information
against the defendant. who was charged
With grand larceny. should state the cir
cGmstauces OF the alleged crime. This
was fun told In Fridays Post-InteIii-
Sencer. Mr. Hart refused TO amend tho
information, after a demurrer had been
flied. and the der.urrer beng sustained.
took an appeal to the supreme court.
The matter came up yesterday morn
inx before Judge Jacobs. Mr.. Parmerlee.
representing the defendant. and Mr.. Hart,
the assistant prosecuting attorney. were In
court. Mr. Hart brought the case up,
stating that the prosecution had deter
mined to allow the matter 10 remain in
the same condition In which 1t stood on
Thursday last. when he had filed In open
court q notice OF appeal from the ruling
eS the court sustaining the demurrer 10
The Information. Mr. Hart sald further
that. notice o: appeal having been given,
ths state took the ground that the super
iof court had no further jurisdiction In the
matter. and that tho court was without
power TO compel the state to amend the
information in conformity with the courts
order Of Wednesday.
Judge Jacobs said: "The court fully
recognizes and comedies the r.gh. OF the
stats to appeal from rs decisions. 1t does
not believe. however. that I: would be
right 10 compel the prisoner 20 remain In
custody during the period necessary 10
carry the case TO the supreme court 10
secure an adjudication. The prisoner Is
therefore discharged and an order to this
erect viii be entered"
Tass ended the proceedings at the morn
ing session. Mr.. Parmerlee carried word
10 his client. and she was discharged from
ne county Jail a few moments later
N the afternoon Deputy Prosecutor Fuf-
son presented an order and Judgment 20
J1oes Jacobs for his signature. The judg-
meat reciied tina facts as they were told
IN the Post-lntelligsncer Friday. II was
~ out that the prosecuting attorney had
given notice OF appeal from the superior
eoar, from the order sustaining the de-
mnrrer and had requested the court TO
bold the defendant under bonds pending
N appeal. The Judgment further reclted
the order that the court had entered re-
curing the prosecuting attorney 10 amend
hA information. as was published FRI
DAY. The court declined 10 sign the jndg-
men', stating that the prosecution might
PEE The record for LIS brief on appeal. a
was found In the court minutes