The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1855-06-19

mon Csunc could rot dischsrse eGac,s no ths datv az
psctsd from them IA 70 the manner N which such IN
must be conducted the power 81 either
Of the bssrds or Of committee In in'errogaung Wit
nessss and the rights and cutie. o. the latter II w Dc
ished parliamentary Law In tse drst 7lass the
annaoa Of tho witnsss must coaassd 70 the subject
fissi s ost ISL Ff1ss e::y
Aus. 25i ssa $50; Peek. .s1; "a, IS; Perry and
Knapp, FOG; X. and o 24sl, or that would tend to
the direct proof Of hs matter under investigation
n. and /, 1851 When the exsmiDaiion 10 before
ss a ns, pas as
ness refuse to snsxer the proper course to tats the
the question Is proper il the duty of tas witaess TO
Ia les isay Il his duty bscsu.s, the stasss IL
must DO brought before the house before the
house can cetTmne whether the question proper or
committee must be laid before ths house, . course
that would be attended sih the greatest
and In mary committee sit daring an adjourn
ment OF tis house or after the ssssion over: aud
in this state, such exsmlnst'ous may be tsksa
BY order Of the house or q coamt.s before person
In any part of tie state tho mttee itself may be
conducting II. investigation In another part Of the
State from that nhsrs the Legsl.turs sitting in some
Of which cases ~ lesst woald bs oh
tain the sense OF the house. Still In in the OF
wnessto refuse, for the COMMITTEES have means to
coeree him. court Of justice may~coerce witness
and compel him 70 answer, because court has to
decide the matter before it, I, not the Office Of
.
mend the ultimate power Of DECISION Being il the sgs.
latve body By whom the committee were appointed
witness would Be justified Ia ref lsins 70 answer auss
tion after cha committee has resolved that 1t was pro-
per one and in which lsgisas body, upon bsins ap
peaed to- would not be disposed to regard the refusal
rather as proceeding from in the witness
from the wish to embarrass the aon Of the committee
rights IL remains, then, but to consider whethsr the
witnesses IN this case were us,idsd in refusing t.
that the Board Of dersn had no right TO invssgste
the matters referred to the COMMITTEES upon the
nsss to the mater under nvs alton Under tbs ars
resolution Of the 9th February, 1856, the committee
person. but the Cdef Of Police That s,uion directed
the COMMITTEES to ascertain from the Chief of Police why
made tina. INJURY of Mr. M.t.e Or hsa hn
their powsis under this resolution spent Their
right to examine the respondents of witnesses must rest
upon the second resolution author zny Thorn to inquire
as 70 frauds or corruption E the Police Department.
and ~ TO the manner In which that dspartment was
upon BY tho respondents that the Common Council have
nothing to do with the Police Department 1t being orga
from the legislative action controi OF the Comusn
Council 90 not howe ,er understand such to be tho
lice pspsrmsrt T. 81 present Il has m.Ss
many in portant alterations an cnanges but there
othng is me Act to sho tbs, the Sspsrtmsnt i to
Act, pi.iniy Indicating sh.s the Common couoc
the department The sppontment o. the Chief Of Police
and Of the police officers vested In other hands
is vested the power Of removal the rules or regud
tons to he adopted for the discipline conduct gov
Mayor tbs Recorder and thu Chic. Of Pois; .aa the
quaNncatioss q officer policemen and doormeu arc
ters tbs Common Council exercises no pcwer The act
specifies tie duties Of the chief aad OF his subordn tss
but there reth:ng in It to prevent the Common Couo
Gil from ipcepg by ordinances addit DUAL duties
all any Of the enicers constituting department.
On the contrary, the act itself declares that they
hall orsr
and regulations prescribed 10 conformity to the ord
pancss of the Common Council, the la the State
to be conformity with the ordiOen es Of the Com
mon Council; and rs the Common Council have the
o.s aS To ms o. 3. ~
the Common Council exercises supervisory and direct
Ing power over tins depsrtnent That and thu.
from The Afth section Of the third article by .hish the
at least every SIX months shs stats Of tho poics in
practical operation with such othar iaor nation in tis
the department. with suggestions Is he m " deem
proper which report the Mayor required TO transmit
seives it, il tho Common Coansa are then in session; or
L not ct the first meeting Of their next regular session
sussestian. As he the Mayor may DEEM propsra It Is
plain ron tal. RrSy a that It rss INTENDED asa
STATE and working II the experiment that abuses might
be corrected that it might bs made more Efficient
sither bJ the passage Of ordinances whca the Common
Council may Rave the power to enact, or by APP
plying to the Lsisiaturs. for the snactment Of
laws essential to render It more useful or eDi-
pstsnt fer either board Of the Counon Council to
Institute inquiry into the state and condition Of the
corruption snd generally 70 inquire into conduct and
mansgemsnt Such was the nature OF the resolution
to s9.as and Ha va. the y Of tas
witnesses to answer any question falling within the OBJ
o. 70 tbs
Witness MoCann was asked Of Whist country he was
tive These questions were irrelevant. Ths committee
directed to inquire investigate any frauds
corruptioss in any branch Of the Police Department.
and ths manner in which IT hat been conducted and
they conaned 70 that subec and could not enter
upon any other. Whether inquiry to the nativity
Of the persons composns the Police Department would
the part Of the common Council i 4 not nscsssay to
determine 1t Is sufficient that II not oraced in
ness rsnssS 10 rs ssy osnsr QUESTION the
tee might esk hm-A refusal entirely unwarrantabie,
and which renders him liable to bs proceeded against as
for contempt. The witness Mccdnn asked his
name how long he had been upon the police and what
ward he attached to- all Of which questions should
bsen n prison in this in any other country. How
much might BE- conprehended under this question,
Is mpossbs to Of upon the mere tsmsnt Of the
question and therefore think that 1t should have been
Sees cos,esa N s or II any oSsr country Of an
infamous crime, though that eircumsanoe would not
Aisqualy him under the act Of 1893 from serving as
might very well be taken into confederation By tbs Com
mon Council, With the Wow Of procuring notifications
changes in the existing law This witness also rsfus
put TO him, and thereby placed himself in the
same petition ~ the witness Webster. The
respondent, Mackellar, was asked six questions,
ali of which hheud have been answered They related
frst to position the OF his duties in the
Police Department. the salary ne received and whether
he received any ton add above his sala
~ not very material to inquire what ONCE he
held what salary be received, both facts could be
ascertared at once by references to the Corporation
Manual but the nature OF his duties and whether he
recsived any compensation above his salary mate
rial Quescns. Mr. Mackear IL the clerk Of the Chief
OF Pelioe; his duties defined BY the police law
other than that he Is required TO perform all such du
ties as the Chief Of Police shall drect his salary is
Do made wi h the approval Of the Board Of Aldermen.
In his caka therefore inqNres certainly