Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1914-09-02
newman QUESTIONS
CUSTER JUDGMENT
Appeal of Commissioner From
Justice GouId's Rulings
Is Filed.
TEN ASSIGNMENTS
OF ERROR ARE MADE
Hundred and Twenty Cases Ahead Of
Commissioners on Docket-Hear-
ing Probably in December.

The appeal of oliver P. Newman.
president of the board Of District Com
missioners. from the custer judgment
of the District Supreme Court was
filed today in the District Court Of APP
peals. Ten assignments of error are
made against the rulings of Justice
Gould by Attorneys Ralston and Rich
ardson and G. W. Holt, representing
Commissioner Newman.
There are 120 cases on the appeal
docket ahead Of the Newman case. I'm
less a motion to advance be made and
granted by the court hearing of the
custer proceedings is not likely before
December Although quo warranto is
an extraordinary remedy in law. it is
not enumerated in the rules of the ap-
pellate court. which provide that most
extraordinary cases be assigned to the
special calendar, which has the prece-
6ence for hearings each month. In the
regular course the Newman case would
probably not be reached until Decem-
Der and might go over until January.
Exceptions to Rulings.
Mr.. Newman's, exceptions to the rul-
ings of the trial judge are:
"I) The court erred in refusing to
permit the respondent to show that the
facts developed in the testimony in
this case had been furnished by him
and by others to the Senate commit
tee examining the matter of his resi-
dence qualifications before conf1rma-
ton of his appointment as civil Com
missioner of the District of Columbia.
"(2) The court erred in refusing to
allow the respondent to show that a
full statement of facts relating to his
residence qualifications, which facts
were submitted in evidence in this
case, had been submitted to and passed
upon by the President at the time of
his appointment to the office of a
civil Commissioner Of the District of
Columbia.
"(3) The court erred in holding that
it was proper for the jury to pass on
the question whether as a fact re-
spondent was an actual resident of
the District of Columbia for three
years preceding his appointment, al
and decided by the President. and also
by the Senate in confirming re-
spondent's appointment, upon sub
stantially the same evidence as was
before the jury in this case. -
Power Of Review Questioned.
a. The court erred in holding that it
had the power to review and reverse the
action of the President and Senate in
nominating and confirming the respondent
in his Office.
IS. The court erred in holding that the
relator had sufficient interest to bring
and maintain this action
&c. The court erred in granting the pc
titioner the right to open and close the
evidence and the right to open and close
the argument to the jury. and in refus-
ing the request of the respondent to open
and close the evidence.
II. The court erred in refusing to grant
the several prayers for instructions sub
mitted by the respondent to be given
| to the jury~and each of them.
"S. The court erred in overruling the
respondents motion for new trial upon
the several grounds assigned in said mo-
ton.
"9. The court erred in overruling re-
spondent's motion for judgment non OBJ
stante veredicto for the several reasons
assigned therein.
10. The court erred in refusing to
grant the respondents motion for arrest
of judgment for the several reasons as
signed therein