Omaha daily bee., 1905-09-09

relates to the mayors Office. and in the
meantime the restraining order will re-
main in force. ] have never known Mayor
Moores to violate an order of the court
and l do not fear that he will violate this
one.
Matters suggested by counsel can be set
up as part of the defense in the contempt
proceeding and will be subject to proof or
refutation."
Judge Sutton's peremptory order to the
county attorney was made after a hearing
of an hour. Attorney Giller asking for
the contempt order, on behalf of T. w.
Blackburn, who secured the restraining or
der, and Attorneys Connell and Breen-the
one strongly against the proceeding, the
other tentatively so-had presented their
contentious at length. Mr.. Giller empha-
sized the alleged indignity to the court
and the bar and suggested that half
dozen members of the latter organiza tion
should be called into the case to possibly
outline a remedy. He also presented af-
fidavits, sworn to by himself and President
Zimman of the, council, giving a detailed
account OF the court and council proceed
ings in the case. He closed by demanding
the offending councilman should be at once
placed in Jail.
Mr. Connell in opening was sarcastic in
his illusions to Messrs Blackburn, Weaver
and Giler, the legal wranglers. or appli-
cants. on the other side He likewise shot
few warm illusions at the electric light
company and the Douglas County Bar as
ISOLATION and threw out a SLY hint as to
barristers without briefs. Then he set
tied down 10 a discussion of the surround
ing facts and circumstances which he
said had TO be taken into consideration.
He said:
No Contempt for Court.
''The members of the city council have
only the highest respect for your honor.
This restraining order was not treated in
a contemptous manner. II was secured at
the last hour before action was 10 be taken
on an ordinance the. had 70 be reported
out under a time limit. The councilmen
we're given no opportunity to be heard in
court. And. in any event, the restraining
order merely enjoins them from passing
the ordinance, not from considering or
voting on H. We claim II never was
passed and is not in any sense a legal or
dinance."
Mr.. Connen then offered a separate an
swer on behalf Of Mayor MooTes and asked
a hearing on It forthwith. He contended
that such a hearing would develop all the
| facts and that II could he readily shown
| that this case was not in the same shape as
cases cited by counsel pleading for the con-
| tempt order. He also dwelt on the fact
that the mayor has, under the charter
until next Tuesday TO sign, veto OF return
/ the ordinance as not legal one.
sutton Ready 10 Act.
When City Attorney Breen had stated
] that he represented the four councilmer
I who refused 10 vote on the ordinance, Mr.
/ Gnler arose 70 elaborate on his argument
Judge Sutton stopped him by saying: 'fh'
court is ready to decide this at once" II,
| then spoke substantially as quoted above.
/ At the end OF Judge Sutton's talk Attor
ney Connell again attempted 10 have th'
I court take action on the mayors end Of the
/ case first. City Attorney Breen hkewis,
suggested that demurrer proceeding NIGH
solve the question OF whether or not the
court had jurisdiction alb initio over th'
/ persons and the subject matter. Then ther'
was a lot OF legal sparring. but the cour
was irm in insisting that the proceeding
, against the councilmen for alleged con
tempt should be heard first. and as quickl!
| as possible.
| All OF the attorneys. Mr.. Connell espe
eially said the sooner the hearing wal
called the better It would suit them. County