A Power Struggle at the Municipal Court
A confrontation unfolds as the City Attorney refuses to prosecute a disorderly conduct case, sparking a standoff over judicial authority in Seattle.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The question of who is running the municipal court of the city of Seattle has not yet been decided. The case of the people vs. Thomas Donovan, out of which the contempt proceedings against City Attorney Fortson arose, was set for 10 o'clock in the municipal court. The defense was ready for trial, but the City Attorney refused to prosecute the case. Judge Glasgow ordered a warrant for his arrest. Assistant Corporation Counsel J. B. Howe argued that the City Attorney is a subordinate officer and subject to the orders of his superiors, including the Mayor. Judge Glasgow, however, insisted that the City Attorney's duty was to proceed, regardless of any internal instructions. Eventually, another attorney was appointed to prosecute, and the defendant was found guilty.
“The question of who shall control this case, the city attorney or the court, should be determined.”
This power struggle between the judiciary and city legal departments mirrors ongoing modern debates regarding the independence of prosecutors and the enforcement of city ordinances.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.