The San Juan islander. [volume] (Friday Harbor, Wash.) 1898-1914, 1906-03-03

Gives 20 Voters oS Giles Of the First
Class the Right 10 Take franchise
ielatiers Out OF Hands OF City Coun-
cils-Oecision vas IN Telephone
franchise case from Spokane.

Olympia, Feb. 27-The state supreme
court has sustained the law of 1908,
which, gives to voters Of cities Of the
first class the right Of initiative with
respect to granting franchises. The
decision was rendered in the much
discussed Spokane telephone case Of
w. w. Hindman against Mayor Boyd
and the council Of that city. Hind
man, as attorney for the Independent
Telephone Company, brought proceed
ings in the superior court demanding
the issuance Of a writ Of mandate re-
quiring the council to submit to the
voters an amendment to the Spokane
charter governing the manner ofgrant-
ing franchises. The petition for the
writ was based upon the contention
that a petition Of 1,7O0 voters, or more
than 10 per cent Of the number Of
those who had voted at the previous
city election. had been presented to
the council under the 1908 law for the
charter amendment, and that the
council was neglecting or refusing to
submit the proposition.
There were many technical points
raised before the Spokane court. The
city, which was represented in the de-
Tense by the attorney for the Pacific
States Telephone and Telegraph Com
pany, commended that the petition did
not contain the Is per cent Of the vot-
ers named, that many Of the sfgners
wero secured through fraud and mis-
representation.
This defense the lower court over
ruled, and therein, committed error,
says the supreme corut. The writ was
granted and appeal was taken Efforts
were made to dismiss the appeal, but
the court holds that the appeal was
properly taken.
Various Points Discussed
The court takes up the various ques-
tions raised and discusses them at
length. It first finds the act is not
unconstitutional and holds the objec-
tions taken to the title to be without
merit. It declares that the people
have the right to take the matter of
granting or rejecting franchises into
their own hands, and that the citizens
arc greater than the charter and may
amend the charter to keep that power
if they desire.
The corut holds also that registra-
ton is not necessary element in the
qualifications Of voter to entitle him
to sign the petitions provided by the
1908 law referred to. In other words,
the Is per cent of the number Of quail
ified voters may be made up Of voters,
whether they are registered or not.
Because Of the denial to the defense
of an opportunity to submit proof
against the suf1iciency of the petition,
the supreme court decides as follows:
"The case is remanded with instruc-
tions to take testimony upon the nee
essary facts concerning the validity Of
the petitions and to enter findings
thereon. IF these findings show that
the petition is in compliance with the
law then the order heretofore made
THAT granting the writ Of mandate)
shall be confirmed and ratified IF the
facts are found to be as commended by
the defense, that is. that not enough
signatures appear on the petition or
they were obtained through fraud and
Misrepresentation, the writ will be
vacated and the action dismissed