The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1899-03-11
Second and Unexpected Climax in
the Van Alstine Case.
OBJECTED TO HIGHER BONDS.
Mrs. yxn AIstIne and Her Sister
Juage Moore-Their Counsel viii
To-day Ask the stnte Supreme
aourt tn Release Them-Lawyer
Dore Confident Of WiuninE.

A SECOND climax ia the Kan AlssIne con-
spi-ses case was reached yesterday morn
ing before Judge Moore. As result Mrs.
Lou Van A!siGne and her sister. Miss En-
ma Merton, are ia the King county jail.
They spent yesterday afternoon and last
night In tire custody OF County Jailer
BaTkmari.
Attorneys John f. DoTe and Charles r.
Shepard do not intend that their clients
shall long be prisoners. They vii leave
early This morning for Olympia where
fhey will apply 10 the supreme court for
n writ 81 hsbsss corpus or writ OF prohi-
sbftion 10 release the two women. Mr..
Dore expressed himself last night as cor-
fiaemf that the court would grant the wi,
at once, so that the fao women may not
find n necessary 10 spend second night
on courthouse hill The women went to
fail. they claim, willingly. for had sh~y
desired 10 furnish q higher }oid which
they sai3 they could have secured. they
would have been free.
But prison fare and the gloomy corrt-
doris OF the courthouse hasesnent did rot
seem TO wofFy them greatly. Miss Nor
TON Was invial and lid not fear that she
would remain IN custody very long Her
sister. Mrs Van Alstine, seemed calm and
contsnted. The women we're not behind
the bars yesterday afternoon. they spent
the day in the office OF ia Her Burkfnan
As there IN no fear of their running away
they will not be kept In very close confine.
ment
Tho commitment BY Judge Moore was
rrecipitased rather unexpectedly yester-
day morning. 1t had not been supposed
that this situation would develop for
several days ard the climax came out Of
clear sky having been forced by At
taTney Dura himself Had he consented
TO an Increase Of the bond OF the women
and had they furnished II. the denone-
nsent would have been postponed. Judge
Moore evidenced desire to have the mat
ter 60 over hnf Mr. Dore would not have
IL so, II the bond were increased
The two women appeared before Judge
Moore on the warrant OF arrest 10 show
cause why they should not he committed
for contempt Of court for failure 10 pro-
diice the san.s@s. which they are alleged TO
have taken from kiendker Van Alstins.
Attorney Dore had fiied an appeal of all
the eases 10 the supreme court aud he had
prepared an answer which iie read II
states his case snecincsly aud with ineisIye
ciearnesss The answer sets 10 two resi-
Sons why the defendants Should not lie
punished for contempt, both az which
question the Jurisdiction of the court one
point Il that the melton for dismissal os
tho case nj Mrs. Van Ais,ine placed her
out OF court. the ether Is that Mrs. Van
Aisiine wns not ut the time proceedings
were hsgaiii. a resident OF the state of
Washington.
But she says that or, December
~ 1898 runs the answer before the
court entered upon the taking of tessi-
mony ar the actual trial or hearing of
the order made in said cassaa on this re-
spendent herein aud on her correspond
ens. Emma Norton. requiring them ia
show casfse why they should NOT b4s or
defed To pay certain certificates OF de-
post or the proceeds thereof into court
this respondent In her capacity az ls|ain-
TIT IN said cause, by her counsel Iohp
n Dore esq. and Charles T. Snssnfra
ssq-. ard npon their advice presented 20
the court and flied her melton Ia dismiss
saii cause ~ hfr own cost, which. ~ she
fhen aud there claimed. and SIN ,fons
titifn. she Was entitled 10 .iss as her own
right and upon her own mere motion and
with said motion she rendered to the
eourt form OF Judgment of dismissal
properly drawn ~ and ready for entry
and record but which ruotios. m. eourt
after argument, denied and thereupon
refused Ia allow sad Judgment 10 he filed
ar entered And this respondent f,1rfher
shows IN this behalf that because. OF said
Dismissal she refused 20 offer any evil
deuce 10 support her complaint or oppose
the answer or crosS-compiainf ~ said de
PENDANT nj the trial of said cause and n;
all times since said dismissal Nnd In all
Subsequent proceedings In said cause sbs
has consistently insisted utDn her rir,,t
10 enter said dismissal at that time and
has insisted that thereby said cause was
tfNtni-~fI anu tasaHrA 10 eAtSt q rs-sft-
ms cause in which iudisial proceedings
could he had by this court
"She further shows that thereafter
when said cause called FOR trial Of
the issues Joined between the parties nv
the ni~aatngs rlea and served prior 10
tier molten TO dismiss. to-wtf ON Eebrt1-
airy =, iSa. by her said counsel she flied
her dismissal NJ s4esd cause I'm this sN.rt
anst Ia connection Herewith offered IA
paw Into court All the taxable >asfS Of
fh- cauSe Immediately uisun fnxafien and
she u advised by her counsel and verify
believes that thereby ssf said prior rho.
ton BY her ia ues effert0ats a dismissal
~ said SHHssf the S8tne was Terminate
hY der said dtsmsszel nled as February $
aud aN subsequent proceedings orslera
ard rmtTiss 2 thls saWSss have n~ssu ANA
0aw are nnii and You'd for lack ~ tgr{s.
dietien II tNe subject matter ar IL the
r4rtses therein !"
r'lee as a second reason whv tie eaurt