Evening star., 1915-01-04
Will Not Discuss Case.

Will Not Discuss Case.
jackson II. Ralston, of counsel for
Commissioner Newman, declined to say
what further steps are to be taken in
the case.
have not seen the decision Of the
Court of Appeals he said, "aud even
after ] shall have had opportunity to
read 1t l do not think shall discuss
it,
1t Is anticipated that application will
be made at once for a writ of certiorari
ana fnal review of the case by the Su:
preme Court of the United States. APP
phcatlon for writ of certiorari acts as
stay until the writ has either been
granted or denied. In the latter event
proceedings are stayed until the Su-
preme Court passes upon the case. Ac-
lon on applications for such writ. 1t
was explained, is usually taken within
Opinion Of the Court.
The court. in it's opinion, says:
This is an action in quo warranto
brought by re1ator, William J. Friz-
zell. citizen and taxpayer. cha1leng-
ing the right of respondent, Oliver P.
Newman, to hold the office OF evil
Commissioner of the District of Co
lumbia
THE petition sets forth that, by the
act of Congress of June II, 1878, pro-
v1dinS permanent form of govern
ment for the District of Columbia, the
President, by and with the advice and
consent of the Senate, was authorized
to appoint two persons from civil life.
who. with an officer of the Corps of
Engineers of the United States Army,
should be Commissioners of the Dis
trict of Columbia. The act provided
that the two persons appointed from
civil life shall, at the time of their ap-
States. and shall have been actual resi-
dents of the District of Columbia for
three years next before their appoint
ment. and have, during that period.
claimed residence nowhere else
1T is further alleged that June rs.
1913, the President appointed respond
ent Newman to the Office of civil Com
missioner; that he was thereafter con-
frmed by the Senate, and that. July
10, 1918, he took the prescribed oatl
and entered upon the duties Of his Of
flee, which he has since held. 1t Is
alleged that respondent was not quail
fed in law to receive such appoint,
ment; that he has unlawfully assumed
and usurped the said Office. and IS not
lawfully entitled to exercise the rune
tions and enjoy the emoiumen.s mere e.
of: that, at the time of his appointment
to- said office he had not been an actuai
resident of the District of Columbia
for three years prior TO MS appot
ment, and that, before his appointment,
he had claimed residence at Cnlcaso'
Ill, and at Princeton, N. ).
Show Cause Writ.
ION this petition, writ was issued
requiring respondent to snow py
warrant he claimed the right 10 .o.N
the office of Commissioner OF tne D'e
trict of Columbia.
"a demurrer and motion to 1uasn
were filed, which we're sustained, ana
the petition dismissed. From thls d"
appeal was taken by relator 10 TINS
court, and the judgment of the coure
below was reversed. Un1tea otdsTs q q
IS. ~. e,-
.Tbe cause was remanded to the Su-
prerne Court NG the Disttact' OF 60
iumbia, and came on for trial oeto5s
jury. A verdict was returned ,rains mnnins =
the Office Of Commissioner. A mouon
for new trial was filed and overruleo.
Motions in arrest of judgment and 1or
judgmnt non obstante veredicto WIZ
filed by respondent and star aenieo ,vss uy en-
tered from which this appeal was
taken.
Newman's Residence.
"It appears from the evidence that
respondent first came to Washington IN
.July. 1901, remaining here until 19o2'
when he went to New Mexico on ac-
count of i'll health, where he remained
until April, 1904. He resided In d1f-
ferent cities of the country until
March, 1910. when he returned 70
washington and entered the employ OF
the Washington Times. With his FAM
iIy he took apartments at the hene-
saw apartment where he remained dur
ing the summer of 1910, removing IN
the fall to the Westminster apaF FlGueh.'
where he resided until July, 1911. when'
with his family, he removed 10 Sni-
cago.
1T appears that he entered into the en-
ploy1nent of the Newspaper Enterprise
Association TO perform neMsPappt.hs
work in Chicago In connection WIZ
the approaching presidential eapen : ~ :,
with the understanding. according to
his own testimony. that when ms
work was completed in Chicago, he
should be returned to Washington No
time seems to have been fHed 1or
.ompletiou of the work i'll Chicago.
Respondent testified that while he
resided in Chicago his household con
sisted of really two families-"ltness
wife, boy and himself. and w1tes Ia
tler aud mother. all occupying the
s;,Iue dwelling. Took II 1nrnished
apartment. having no household furni
ture at all Sent the boy to the pubic
school in Chicago recollection is that
lie mother entered linn. Recalled GO
ing with her one day to sec one of the
assistant supcrintendents about which
school he should enter. but recollec-
tinn is that was the only Information
he had about 1t. They llved
first in a furnished flat: then little
family hotel; then boarding house
then "A furnished fiat In Evanston
Registered From Chicago.
1T further appears from his own tes'
timony that he never registered ol
voted in Chicago. His name and ad
dress appeared in the city directory o.
Chicago for the year 1912. l.c. how
ever testified that he did not know
| his name was in the directory un.-
after he returned to Washington
! While i'll Chicago he was engaged II
newspaper work, aud Travelled abou
! considerable usually registering a
! hotels from that c,ty. but never regis
CONTINUED on Second Page.)