Bisbee daily review., 1918-07-17
ATTORNEY 0. GIBSON FILES LETTER
 WITH BOARD
Calls Attention to Previous Removal Petition Still Pend ing in Supreme Court; They Are Liable for Contempt

When the county seat removal peti- tions were filed in Tombstone on Mon- day, Attorney O. Gibson of Tombstone, filed the following letter with the board calling their attention to the condition of the previous case, that is now pending in the supreme court and stating that the board was liable for contempt if they took any action rn the petition that was filed on Monday:
 July 15, 1918. To the Honorable Board of Supervis- ors, of Cochise County:
 In the outset l wish to say that this letter is written in a spirit of friendliness for the board, realizing that any duties you may have to per form, in regard to the matters ais cusSed, are thrust upon you by law, and that you have no option but to perform them, except as you are re- strained from doing so by order of court.
 I desire to call your attention to the condition of the case of the un- dersigned against yourselves, in which a writ of prohibition issued, restraining you from taking any ac- tion upon the petition filed in your office during May, 1917, asking that an election be called to change the location of the county seat of Cochise county.
 Permit me to say, first, that said case is now pending upon appeal, in the supreme court of the state of Ari- zOna.
 The proceedings in said case may be tersely stated as follows:
 The clerks notice to voters that said petition had been filed was dated June II, 1917. June 12, 1917, I ob- tained an order, directing that a writ of prohibition issue, and writ was issued by the clerk, on June 24th, and served promptly by the sheriff.
 A hearing was had upon this peti- ton November 2, 1917.
 On November 10, 1917, Judge BaX- ter, who heard the case, filed his writ ten decision, dissolving the writ of prohibition
 On December 12, 1917, Judge Baxter fixed the amount of supersedeas bond, for the purpose of superseding his or der of November 10, 1917.
 December 15, 1917, said bond was approved by Judge Baxter, and the ap- peal in said case was perfected, a no- tice of appeal having been filed few days previous to the approval of said bond, and the supreme court, there fore, acquired jurisdiction of said cause.
 On December r, 1917, you held an official session for the purpose of con sidering said petition, and on said last mentioned date entered your order dismissing said petition, for certain irregularities brought to your attention. The said order of prohibit ton having been restored to full force by the supersedeas bond, approved December 15, 1917, two days before your session was held, your act in dis missing said petition was nugatory and void. and you were technically in contempt of court for considering said petition.
 My position in the matter is that the petition filed in May of last year is still before you, same having never been legally disposed of.
 Section 4, of Chapter 5, of the Acts of the First Regular Session of 1915 jrovides that:
 Any number of petitions for such removal may be so signed, and when filed in the office of the board of su- pervisOrs shall be attached together and deemed to be one petition"
 In the view 1 entertained of the matter under Section just quoted, il will be necessary to attach the prior petition to the new petition just filed, and since you are prohibited by the order of June 12, 1917, from consider ering the old petition, and since the old petition is by law made a part O: the new petition, you are prohibited, by the writ of prohibition, from talk ing any action on the new petition as separate and distinct from the old one. until the decision of the appeal in the case aforesaid.
 I brought the case aforesaid in good faith. and have prosecuted same in that spirit up to this time. and now notify the board that I propose that the writ of prohibition, issued out of a court of record of this state, shall be respected. until the supreme court has passed upon the question involved; and if the board takes any action upon the petition lately filed, I shall ask the supreme court of Ari- zona for citation against each mem Der of the board for contempt of the supreme court, wherein the jurisdic- ton of said case is now lodged, for taking such action.
 Respectfully submitted.
 o. GIBSON.