The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-11-30

more can the resolution Of the ,h oc.scr incorporate
| body OF men who were strangers 10 tho ofacn
During his argument, Mr.. Field Commented with rreat
verify he conduct OF Mayor Wood and The Old DO
lice Say ing they had dgraced the city and had forfeited
ali rigft to be regarded as members Of the police
M Noyes next in behalf OF the Board Of Police dis
cussed the Afpwing quesston;Dd the members of the
old or CITY police who adAeved TO the Mayor and CITY
Judge become members of the Metropolitan police by
virtue Of the law i~ef He commended with great earn
estnees and ability that they did that the duties
dneren; the place where those duties To be per-
formed was changed, and that they had Sher election
accept Office decline it, He cited numerous cases in
illustration OF the position he assumed and contended that
a removal on the part Of the board was wholly unne-
cessary.
He commenced by asking for the speedy decision,
in consequence Of its public Importance He then stated
and argued al length, the following points :
The defendant not Board Of State officers and con-
sequenty cannot claim exemption from the restraint by
Injunction. Section OF the act 2 Section 70 makes
the defray the expenses local g. The Court of APP
peals holding the laws constitutional nowhere decides
that the members OF the Board State officers L. Tho
residence Of the Commissioners 10 local.
2 The plaintiff has right In Court, ~ tax payer,
and also In right Of his Office 10 prevent the appointment
Of person Oil Office which he entitled and from
which he might DO compelled TO remove the now appontee
g. The question, whether recognising the old Commits
soners instead Of the Board election not TO
under the Board in this for tho
that the resolution Of the Board Of the 9th October
expressly recognises such members Of the sold police as
have not been dismissed according 10 law" a. members
Of the present police force. The question as To the
regularity Of the dismissal therefore, is the only one that
can be raised branch Of the The Board of
Police esstopped by their own action from taking any
other objection than that Of y regular dismissal.
a. IT. however, the defendant insists that recognizing
the old Commissioners election not to take Office
under the new, then the question Of removal is out
OF the case for no one can be from place which
he not occupy The Board having the power
point have by the resolution Of 9th October appointed or
recognized the old police who not dismissed accord
ing 70 law The dismissal OF men who were not in the
place WAS q nullity and could be waived by the
Board, II, under any circumstances, II could be
effective The Board under advice OF counsel in this
position 1t has declared that recognizing the former
Board and refusing 10 recognise the new Board was
necessary has then resolved that all the old police"
not "dismssed according to law are members Of the
present force follows that the last act of the Board
all are members who have not been removed under Sec
Of the law No such removal could take place prior to
the acceptance Of the Office II follows that all the old
force who have been removed "for cause" subse-
quent to accepting office under the Board are
members Of the police force, removals Of the old
force have been made since the Sd Of July Hence the
force is full and the Board can make no new appoint
ments.
g. Until the committee report the subject of dismis
sails and say who have been rregulary removed they
must be framed for until that report is made, they
cannot know that there are any vacancies.
chou me a1avs INTRODUCED on .he par. Of ane Board
Complaint is not oath Rule Of the Board requires
that should be- b. The plaintiff not notified to call
examine the charges This the It'll rule of the Board
requires. Gen Nye that all the other police
men have been removed in 'simar Manner Hence
he swears that they have not been removed al all.
T. Assuming the force is full, and that they have
hory appoint then what the injury to the Taxpayers
a By sec Is the pay of patrolman $500 per annum
the amount lost to the city annually there TOO of
those kept from duty, $3.50 000 by o. the Board
10 Tx the tax upon the real and personal property Of the
city, and the tax is binding BY Sec Is the Treasurer
Of the Board to dsburse the raised for the purpose
Of paying police expenses d. II is to say,
has been said here that the Commissioners personally
responsible for the pay Of the whom they appoint be-
yond the legal number; for they dsburse the fund
through their treasurer though the city may have legal
remedy, yet all know that the litigation TO which il
would lead would only be source OF new and increased
taxation.
Mr.. Dean, after commenting upon his points, re-
piled TO the points OF the counsel for the Boarddweing
with special emphasis the inconsistency Of their posi-
ton in claiming at time that these men had never
been members Of the new police and that when one
of the old police no matter how worthy, applied for
appointment, the same counsel told the Board that he
could not be appointed because he had been removed
That is, he had been removed from an office which he
never held, and that that removal was perpetual life
long exclusion from Office. He did not attribute " the
Board its members any especial accumen, but he
confident that they were not duh enough not 10 under
were adhered TO could only be from political consdera
tons, and desire TO prescribe good men and worthy
officers on account Of their political opinions He then
alluded to the remarks made by the counsel OF the Board
that these men had dgraced the city He denied It, and
concluded by eulogzing them and their conduct con
astng the unpunished ourages and assassnations
with the state Of quiet and security that prevailed in
former years
Judge Davies, Immediately the conclusion OF
the argument, proceeded do deliver his opinion
verbally, and Promised at an early day, 10 reduce
organized the police OF the city, and made tho
tenure Of their office during life; that this was In
teLded them from party politics, and TO have
body men apart from the who would devote
their whole lives 20 this service; that the Law OF 1857
changed the Commissioners but did not change the tenure
Of the oice-on the contrary, by ts terms explicitly
recognized the police then In oce and continued tnem in
Office so carefully bad provided for this that the 33d
section gives the Board power 20 remove any member
OF the old police possessing the requisite qualifications
but only trial, provided In the 18th section. He
held therefore, that all the members OF the city police
were members OF the police, unless they had
been removed in The manner prescribed In the act That
the manner Of removal, II must be after personal
service Of the charges against the person complained Of
vded by statute and this not OF them that the
Board had themselves understood the law but
evidently had dsregardcd IT, the proof now appeared
The Judge cited several cases. examples where the
Supreme Court had hcd-among the rest the OF
Rathhun Acker, IN the is Barbour superior Court
Reports That whether not adhcrng to tho Mayor and
City Judge, instead OF recognizing the new board was
OF INSTRUMENTATION which would have justified
removal need not DO decided, for was, AT any rate
they were entitled TO trial, and the Board had clearly,
by their resolution Of the 9th October, waived H. and
recognized all members Of the force who had not
prior that time been removed according to law That
appeared the proof now before him, the force was
full and appointments would be null and void
and " made, the Commissioners making the appoint
ments would be personally liable for the Of the ncn
and FOR all that would cost the city in consequence In
support this the Judge cited the OF Rae The
Mayor Of Belfast decided IN 1855, which he said fully
supported this position In conclusion is Honor remark
ed that there allegation that the Police Com
mssioners not pecunarly able 10 pay the city for
any expense 10 which u may be subjected, and mas
much a. cannot presume that after the Court has de.
cared what the Law 4. that the Board will proceed 10
violate and make appointments, I do not think
that injunction should be issued at this time but on
the contrary, I should presume that the Board will
now proceed In obedience the law the spirit and
letter Of their resolution Of the 9Th October.
The Judge then promised 70 reduce bis opinion 10 writ
ing At early day next week and the Court adjourned
The old police who bad been attentive listeners, dc
parted with light hearts and Joyful faces.
-~----