The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1906-12-20

According to the verdict Of the
jury, rendered shortly after 9 o'clock
last night, A. H. DAlemberte, who
has been alderman from precinct No.
IL, is no longer eligible to represent
that precinct in the City Council. The
verdict of the jury, which was rem
dered according to instructions from
the court, Gusts the alderman from
the Office which he had been holding
for nearly two years, and unless some
other proceeding Is instituted by the
defendant the City Council will be
called upon to fill the vacancy.
Some months since quo warranto
proceeding was instituted by citizens
residing in precinct No. II. This pro-
ceeding had as its motive the ousting
of the alderman from Office upon the
ground that he was not eligible to
hold the position of alderman from
precinct No. IL by reason of the fact
that he was not a resident of the
precinct, and had not resided in it
since his election to Office, but that
] he was a resident of another precinct.
The Case Set for Trial.
When the papers in the case were
presented to Judge Carter some
months since he announced that the
case would be heard in Pensacola on
December 10, and yesterday morning
it was called. A jury to hear the
testimony was secured as follows:
]. A. Kirkpatrick, p. ID. DeVine, d.
NJ. Henderson, Harry Captain, ]. w.
Sutherland and James Nix.
Blount & Blount appeared for the
defendant and r. p. Reese and Jones
& Pasco for the plaintiffs, and the
, examination of witnesses was COM
menced. Twenty-three witnesses were
on the stand during the day, among
them being DIR. G. F. Marsh, A. V.
Clubbs, Chas. H. Turner, w. b.
Wright, S. F. Fulghum. VIM. R. John
son, l.. Z. Brooks. Thos. Pebley, II.
o. Arson, J. Whiting Hyer, j. w.
Lusk and others.
The defense endeavored to prove
that Alderman D'Alembertes removal
J from precinct No. L was only tenn
; porary and that it was caused by
the fact that he was unable TO Sc
cure suitable home for his family.
and furthermore witnesses were in
troduced to show that many months
since he had purchased lots in pre-
cinct No. II upon which to build q
home for his family, where he in
tended making his permanent resi-
dence. Il was also shown by the de-
Tense, by the testimony of Chas. II.
Turner and A. V. ClUbbs, that he had
called upon them relative to the erec-
ton Of a home, but on account Of the
scarcity of labor and advance In ma
terial he had been advised not to
build at that time. By Architect Full
ghum It was shown that he had COM
menced at one time drawing plans
for the home. This evidence, the de-
tense contended, was ample to prove
the intention of Mr.. D'Alemberte to
return TO precinct No. IL as soon az
possible. and that his residence out
side was due 10 circumstances ana
that it was only temporary.
The plaintiffs, however, introduced
witnesses to prove that he had offered
to purchase residences in other pre-
cincts, particularly the residence or
DR.. C.. F. Marsh. The plaintiffs also
: endeavored to prove by the testimony
. of Thos. Pebley and ]. Whiting Hyer
, that the latter were agents for resi-
dences that were for rent during the
time that Mr.. D'Alemberte was resid-
ing outside of the precinct, and by
Leslie E. Brooks that MIR. DAlemberto
had offered to sell him the lots which
the alderman had purchased in pre-
cinct II.
The testimony was concluded late
lin the afternoon, and the arguments
q of the attorneys, in which many
!, authorities we're cited, consumed sew
|, eral hours, not concluding until about
h 9 o'clock last night.
O Judge Carter then announced that
\ while it was not customary 70 In
6 struct iuries as to the verdict in q
, case OF this nature. he would exer-
!. else the power and instruct the jury
L TO return a verdict in favor OF the
!. plaintiffs. The verdict was written
d by one of the attorneys and signed
by ]. A. kirkpatrick as foreman.