Aberdeen herald. [volume] (Aberdeen, Chehalis County, W.T.) 1886-1917, 1906-03-19

concerned; that is the defendants in
this action admit that they Destroy
ed the building complained of BY
the plaintiffs, but deny that such
destruction was unlawful, and by
way of justification they claim au-
thority for such destruction under
these ordinances and resolutions and
adjudication that I have here.ofoi e
referred to. Referring TO these or
dinances and resolutions, the same
being ordinances number 37c and
375 and the resolution of Octoter
18th, 1903, l instruct you, gentle
men of the jury that as matter
OF law such ordinances and resolu-
tions are not sufficient to authorize
the defendants or either of them, to
destroy plaintiffs building in the
manner complained of or at all
1 instruct you further that as
a matter of law such ordinances and
resolution are not sufficient, and
were not sufficient in law to justify
the defendants to trespass against
the persons of the plaintiffs or to
tresrass against the stock Of goods
of the plaintiffs.
Speaking in relation to the former
adjudication between the plaintiff in
this action and the city of Aberdeen
above referred to, instruct you that
as matter of law the plaintiffs in
this case are bound by the Judgment
in that case, and that the Judgment
in that case is sufficient in law to
authorize the city of Aberdeen 10
destroy plaintiffs building. ami that
the city of Aberdeen upon the proper
procedure might and could have pro-
cured the taking down of plaintiffs
building, and for such taking down,
if done in reasonably prudent man.
ner, the defendants in this action
would not be liable to the plaintiffs
in damages; providing, however,
that if the city of Aberdeen and the
defendants in this action in the ey-
ercise of the rights given thom by
virtue of the judgment of the court
above referred to, acted impruIeatlv
and unreasonably either in dealing
with the building itself or Will,
plaintiffs in this action, or either of
them, or with the personal property
or stock of goods belonging to the
plaintiffs, and that by reason of such
imprudence and reasOnableness they
did unnecessary damage to the plain
tiffs' building by way of destruction
of the material of which it was COM
posed, or drove the said plaintiffs
out of the possession of their stock
of goods against their will and pro-
tests, or If they without reason and
excuse therefor unnecessarily in
jured or destroyed plaintiffs person
al property or goods, then I instruct
you that as matter of law the de-
PENDANTS in this action notwithstand-
ing the right that they had origin
ally the right to go upon the prem
ises for the. purpose of reducing the
building in reasonably safe and
prudent manner, yet as a result of
such irnprudent and unreasonable
acts, or either of them, the defend
ants in this action would as a mat
ter of law become trespassers alb
initio, that is trespassers from the
beginning, and they would forfeit
any right which they may have had
by reason of such former adjudica-
ton.
What mean by this, gentlemen of
the jury, and that you may under
stand it more plainly by way of il
lustration 1 would state that if the
sheriff of this county, upon a judg-
ment of this court, should be di-
rected to destroy the property of any
of your citizens, or to abate them
as nuisance, or as having been
built in violation of law, and such
sheriff should by virtue of such writ
go in and upon the premises of such
a citizen and under color of execut-
ing the writ of this court should un-
necessarily injure and damage the
property of the owner, or should