The Colfax gazette. [volume] (Colfax, Wash.) 1893-1932, 1900-09-21

superior court, the Hon. William Nc
donald, ordered and commanded the
sheriff TO bring the said Hugh Boyle H.
10 open court, and there had d private
consultation with him, together with the
attorneys which the court then and
there appointed TO defend the said Hugh
Boyle, and before the said Hugh Boyle
had been called into court and arraigned
upon Information, and stated that he
was unable to employ counsel in his de-
tense. That all OF these proceedings, in
atlantis opinion, have disqualified the
said William Mcdonald iron being an
impartial Judge in said matter. That
Notwithstanding the fact that the
statute, tO-wit, Sec. No. 1874, Of 2nd
Hlll S code, provides that d dismissal of
an action, where the same is d felony
shaii not be bar to Ii prosecution for
the same Offense; that the court, upon
the mere statement OF one Thomas Neill,
one OF the attorneys previously appoint
ed to defend said Hugh Boyle, and
assisted in bringing the said original
writ OF habeas corpus for the said Hugh
Boyle, that said defendant had been re-
arrested upon the same charge, that the
court thereupOn stated from the bench,
IN the presence OF the jury who might
nave been called upon TO try said case,
and before whom the court is now insist
ing that afiant shall try said case, that
the arrest of said Hugh Boyle was
contempt OF court, and that he would
have the parties interested or connected
Herewith brought before him and pun
ished for contempt; and that thereupon,
the said Judge Immediately left the bench
in an apparent fit OF rage, and went in
TO his private office, and during most of
the entire day thereafter continued to
talk about the outrage perpetrated by
re-arresting the said Hugh Boyle, that
the SAID court suggested to the said ]
/. Brown, the present petitioner OF the
said Hugh Boyle to prepare a writ of
habeas corpus, and bring him before
him, and that he would thereunon dis.
charge the said Hugh Boyle from ems
tody. That thereafter the said Judge
told and stated to affiant that if he
would produce his witnesses before him
on this date, and in the presence of the
defendant and his attorneys, and state
what were the facts and evidence upon
which he expected to convict him, and
that ii the state had what he deemed
to be sufficient evidence, and if the aft
ant would thereupOn go to trial forth
with, that they would thereupon pro-
coed, but otherwise he would DISCHARGE
the said defendant. That said court
we'll knew that il defendant was arrested
at this time, that he could not be tried
within five days from the oath day of
September, 1900. That the court
further knew that it was unjust to the
state to show it's case tho the defendant
in full before the time for trial; that the
court further knew that there was suffi
cient evidence to warrant the said Hugh
Boyle being held over, for he had pre-
vlOusly examined fully, and inquired in
to the matter, and had witnesses sworn,
and had himself, by retaining the said
Hugh Boyle IN custody, shown that he
considered that there was probable cause
OF the guilt Of the said Hugh BOYLE for
said crime.
That all of these acts of the said Will
lam Mcdonald are so patent that affiant
states under oath that he does not be-
lieve that the said William Mcdonald is
without bias in this case, and affiant
further states that he does not believe
that if the said William Mcdonald
oAoulu Wy sdiu Cduse IndU he would
render fair and impartial judgment
thereon or give the law as it is and
atfiant at this time now gives notice to
the said William Mcdonald that if he
or attempts to discharge, or
to interfere in any manner with the
prosecution OF the said Hugh Boyle un-
til the same shall come before him regu-
larry and in proper manner, that affiant
will forthwith apply to the supreme court
of this state for a writ of prohibition
herein, and restrain the said William Nc
Donald from acting in said cause what
soever. VIM. A. INMAN,