, 1875-07-18
TIE POLICE GOVERNMENT.

capacity of the late Board
---@.e..N..
TIE POLICE GOVERNMENT.
Judge McAL11srER's decision in the casa OF
the Police Commissioners vs the Mayor and
Common Council Of Chicago may be accept
ed as e1tiaguishing that Board
The points presented in this case are few
and plain. For the purpose Of the case, it
was assumed that the charter of 1872 Is in
force, and the decision Of the Judge follows
that assumption. The charter being consle-
cred in operation, it authorizes the Common
Council to provide by ordinance for the cre-
alton Of certain enumerated offices, and the
designation Of the duties Of the officers to be
elected or appointed thereto, and also au-
thorizes the creation Of all such other Offices
as the Council may from time to time deem
required. One Of tho Offices thus authorized
is City Marshal. In the exercise Of this
power the Common Council did create the
Office Of City Marshal, and assigned to him
the general powers, duhes, and functions
heretofore possessed by the Board of Police.
The Police Commissioners sought by An
Injunction to restrain any action under this
ordinance pending an inquiry by quo wdT-
ranto. It will be remembered that the Board
of Police and Fire Commissioners was crest
ed BY net OF Legislature, the Commissioners
being elected by the votes Of the people OF
Cook County, and their jurisdiction extend
ing al over the county. It has been object
ed that the Commissioners were not "city
officers merely, but were chosen by larger
constituency, and had territorial jurisdic-
ton beyond that governed by the Mayor and
Common Council, and that, therefore, they
could not be superseded by any action of the
Common Council; and, further, that the
charter of 1872 was not 50 inconsistent with
the act creating the Board Of Police as to re-
@ ho.- - --~-~4ve OF lega ..--s-
.JnuEe fARwEn refused the injunction, and
refused 10 extend it pending an appeal, and
Judge MoA111srER, of the Supreme Court,
has refused to extend the injunction pending
the appeal.
Judge MoA111srEn defines the Jurisdiction
Of cbancery Courts to be confined exclusively
to questions Of property; they have no iuris-
diction in criminal cases. and none in poiti-
cal He states that no sane man would claim
that the Courts can enjoin the Legislature,
and it has been long established that Legis-
1atures can delegate authority to municipal
corporations, therefore no Court has author
ity to enjoin the government Of city from
doing any act warranted by the power dele
<..4.1 ~ 1Y Abo Eto&a III
considers, and so decides, that the passage Of
the ordinance creating the Office Of City
Marshal, and conferring upon that officer al
the police authority hitherto exercised by the
Board Of Police Commissioners, is within the
powers delegated to the Mayor and Common
Council Of .Chicago. He does not agree with
those who consider that this Police Board and
Other Boards were abolished tpso tac9o BY the
adoption OF the charter. He thinks that, as
in this case, action by the Council was neces-
sary. and when this action took place the
Commissioners ceased to be city officers.
With respect to the question, What be-
comes Of the Police Board after they cease
to be "oity officers ~ he zays: "What re-
mains Of their Office ia not for me to deter
nina"
We understand this opinion as going to the
extent that the City Marshal is the legal sue
cessor to all ths powers, functions, and au-
thority Of the Board Of Fire and Police Com
missioners, 30 for Is relates TO the police.
He says that, "by the provisions Of the act
of 1872, clear plenary power over the Po-
ice Department Of the city is vested in the
Common Council Il is an authority to re-
organize and control that entire department,
given in the broadest language to the Council
and such offices IS it, in its discretion, might
choose to create" Under the old law, the
jurisdiction Of the police Of Chicago e1-
tended all over the county, and, We suppose,
as there is nothing in the new charter incon-
Gstent with this part Of the old statute, that
police authority over the whole county con-
tinues unchanged.
So far as the abolition Of tho Fire and
Police Board goes, there will be no regret.
The friends OF the charters of 1879 and 1876
all favored the abolition Of that Board, which
had long since ceased to be anything but an
obstruction in the City Government. The
President Of TINT Board, Ar. MARE SERBIAN,
i man Of ability, and, We believe, Of strict
personal integrity. He has, however, failed
IS Police Commissioner, not for want OF
intelligence, but from a negligence and mis-
apprehension Of his duties His administra-
ton has damoralizedt the force. He has never
had any notions of discipline He is man
OF generous sympathies He has been hail
fellow with all his subordinates, their CON-
panion, associate, and counsel, instead of
their superior officer, owing responsibility
to tho public for their conduct. He has
deemed it "hard law that required IN
officer to bo punished for drunkenness, or
for disorderly conduct, for beating citizen
unnecessarily, orforthe improper, indeoorous,
or brutal exercise Of his poics authority, and,
whsrsrer possible, has refused to punish, or
il hs punished he imposed psnAty 70 light
tha4 \ served n N encouragement rathcz
thsa a 4 puniahuank Ths saeot has bean