The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-09-07

articles wherein CRITICISMS wsrs MAZE %
certain rulings end judgments % Hon
Orange Jscoas. one OF the tsasss OF tne
superior court OF this county. hsvs taHen
oeeaaen ancs tnss time - bwvssessse
some ~ the matters referred TO IN these
articles. Having had seversi years se-
auainsance With Judge Jacobs. nests1s
hfm a. o lawyer sf The bor. ana fiso
practic.ny before him while on the senc1-
I felt that the crit cfsrn Of your always
fair minded payer must be founded on
some mistake Of fact. have not had the
opportunity to ascertain the facts in 81
the matters mentioned in POUR article. but
In many OF the cases concerning winch
have more or les knowledge, find that
essential errors were contained In me puo-
lished statements.
For instance. you refer 20 the case %
one Reynoids. who was tried twice before
the superior court on the charge Of grand
larceny. on the FIRST trial the jury having
Disagreed, and on the second there being
. verdict Of acqnittai. The record " ths
cowst shows that Judge JACOBS iid not sf
at the second trial oS Reynolds. but tast
. visiting Judge was then presiding in The
criminal department Of this county, Judge
Jacobs being absent In the eastern part
Of the state. II 10 plain, therefore. That
any rulings Of the court made st the trial
at which Reynolds was acquitted were
the rulings OF the visiting judge. and not
OF Judge Jacobs.
Referring to the case Of Phillips. who
was tried for the murder Of officer James
Wells, the inference might be drawn from
your articles that Philips when first ar
rested. resisted by shooting ST the officers
before being taken 90 the jail. where The
shooting Of Wells occurred. I am credsssly
informed that phillips fred no shot what
ever prior 90 the shot which killed Wells
az the police station. II understand your
article Alright and my infcrmatien Of TIE
facts 10 correct there would b . material
variance between the published account
and the facts 90 they actually occurred.
90 far a. concerns the charge Of Judge
Jacobs 10 the Jury at the trial Of Philips.
I am Of the opinion that that portion CT
the charge defining manslaashter and the
different degrees 81 murder IN connection
with the rights OF n person arrested with
out . warrant, was a correct statement
OF the law. The wsii-known case Of West
W. Cabeli. decided BY the supreme court
OF the United States in isp4 lays down
the rule OF law on this subject az stated
BY Judge Jacobs. and I understand his
charge to the jury on this point was based
on that case. find nothing IN the charge
which would Indicate that Judge Jacobs
stated 20 the Jury that the officers were
not justified In shooting when Ph1sips re-
sisted arrest understand that no excsp-
tion on behalf Of the state was taken 20 the
charge on that point, u beng sustained 81
the highest authority. also understands
that ths record shows that the question e
the sanity Of the prisoner was gone..nso st
great length by both sides and tho as
much latitude was given the state a. was
given the defense I have no doubt that
Judge Jacobs, in common with all other
citizens Of this community. deeply regret
ted the death of so good ar officer as
James Wells. and fall to fad that se n
structed the fury that the officer in any
way exceeded his authority. n was the
duty Of the fudge. when 50 requested. 20
declare the law applicable In cases Of ar
rest without warrant. and this he did. fsnv-
ing the disputed facts to be settled by the
jury.
Tho list ~ cases published by you. I'm
which Judge Jacobs has imposed uodsr-
ate sentences ~ not q full list ~ the
cases tried before him In which be rer.s
dered judgment. nor does 10 show SOM
of the severer sentences pronouncef nv
him. Many 81 the cases In which Judge
Jacobs pronounced light sentences were
cases % young men. and I understand
that In all Instances where such sentences
were pronounced they were cases 81 FIRST
oHense, 80 far "a the court Va advised
NJ the time If pronouncing sentences. His
course In this respect. IL seems 10 me 20
a humane one. and r.. after MI. best cal
cuiated 20 accomplish good results 10
society generally. think the record will
show that the more serious cases ~ lar
ceny, embezzIement ard similar oyenses
have been punished by sentences ranging
from four ~ seven years.
I feel that the articles above referred
10 DO not do Justice % Judge Jacobs
whose long residence and upright Hfs
In this state sntff1e him 20 the bf~h 49,.
TEEN IN which he - held by hts fellow
citizens In view 81 hfs honorabIe M
dfcial record. as recognized BY the mem
bers - the bar ard public generally. and
In view also 81 the disposition " your
paper. 80 often manifested, 20 ~ emf
nently fair IN the discussion % public
matters. have felt N proper 10 call your
attention % the foregoing facts Yours
very respectfully. aH PILES.