Ousted Over an $18.90 Lumber Bill, a Councilman Gets His Seat Back

The city council of Ballard had declared the office of Thomas Winsor, councilman for the term of two years, vacant and had appointed George M. Armour to fill the alleged vacancy. The action was taken February 27 upon charges that Winsor had violated section 600, article 6, volume 1, of the Code of Washington by having furnished lumber to the city of Ballard and put in a bill of $18.90 to the city for the same. The charges were founded on a bill made out by Marshall Bond against the city of Ballard for $18.90, accompanied by an affidavit of Thomas Winsor "as agent of the claimant."

Mr. Winsor said that no copy of such charges was ever served on him, no trial was ever granted him, no witnesses were sworn to support the charges, and no ordinance existed in support of them; that he protested in open council against their action, and that the resolution ousting him was passed without any investigation into the truth or falsity of the charges. At a meeting in March, after he had been ousted, he attempted to take his seat and was refused. No information or indictment had ever been filed against him in any court, nor had he been tried or convicted of a violation of the section of the general statutes on which he was illegally removed.

City Clerk Marsh testified as to the record showing the action of the council in removing Winsor. His minutes of the meeting held February 20 — the one at which Keane introduced the charges against Winsor — showed a motive for them in the following entry: "Winsor submitted charges against City Treasurer Keane of unlawfully retaining $1,058 belonging to the city while he was city treasurer in 1898. Motion that the charges be referred for one week was reconsidered. A motion that the city attorney be instructed to bring suit in the courts to recover the shortage due the city was also reconsidered. It was then moved and supported that the city attorney be instructed to bring suit against ex-City Treasurer Keane to recover the shortage due the city."

Mr. Winsor closed his case with two witnesses, and the defense commenced putting on the councilmen, who all testified to about the same purpose — namely, that no regular trial was had to investigate the truth or falsity of the charges; that at the meeting when Winsor was ousted he was asked to make a defense but refused to do so, declaring their action illegal, and that thereupon they adopted the resolution appended to the charges submitted by Keane on February 20 and ousted Winsor. Keane proved to be a hard witness on cross-examination, refusing to answer directly until repeatedly ordered to do so by the court.

The arguments having been closed were brief, and then Judge Langley gave his decision:

"Mr. Winsor," he said, "stands upon his legal rights, and he is entitled to have those rights respected until properly taken away. They can be taken away only by a fair trial with sufficient notice thereof. The evidence shows that no trial was ever given Mr. Winsor, and the character of this lumber bill transaction was never properly investigated. The council seemed to have taken all its evidence from this one bill for lumber and its accompanying affidavit, and acted thereon with undue haste. It would be an unfortunate condition of things for this country if the burden of proof were ever thrown on the defendant. It would not only be in direct violation of all established precedents, but it would be a revolution of existing affairs to ask a man to prove his own innocence. Mr. Winsor's attitude throughout, speaking from a legal standpoint, was that of a demurrer. He had protested repeatedly. If he was guilty his demurrer was availing him; if innocent his demurrer would still avail him. The law is so jealous of the personal rights of its citizens that it allows no taint from presumption. There must be a train of circumstances that show a man to be guilty. This body of men, or council, acted hastily and injudicially in their efforts to carry out the provisions of the law they thought had been violated; to that extent they no doubt acted as they thought was right and as good citizens, but they nevertheless acted injudicially and proceeded illegally in refusing to let him be heard before a proper tribunal. They should have given him a full hearing and insisted on it; then, had Mr. Winsor refused to offer any defense, their action would have been legal. I think Mr. Winsor has been wrongfully and unlawfully removed; and as that action was illegal there has never existed a vacancy in his office as councilman, and he still holds the office to which he was properly elected. The appointment of Armour to the alleged vacancy of Winsor's place was, as a consequence of the other action, likewise illegal and void, and a judgment of ouster is hereby decreed against George M. Armour, and the plaintiff will recover his costs."

Judge Langley added that the present decision would not bar the Ballard council from proceeding against Mr. Winsor in a proper form if they still felt inclined to follow him up on this lumber bill transaction.

It is understood that considerable fun will be afforded the sportsters at the coming meeting of the Ballard council, as Mr. Winsor will soon resume his proper place and proposes to find out what has become of the charges he lodged against Keane and why they are lying dormant.