The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1876-03-20
THAT QUO wARRANTo.
Judge Cochran Decides Adversely to
Geo, II. Keutelle on the City
Attorreyship.

Arguments were heard by Judge Coch-
ran, of the circuit court, yesterday, on the
question Of the legality of Mayer Robi-
sons removal of George H. Kettelle from
the Office of city attorney. Judge Puter-
baueh opened the argument in behalf of
Kettelle, and spoke about an hour.
Thomas Crafty responded in behalf of Mr..
Harmon, and was followed by Jonathan X O..
Cooper on the same side. Judge Puter-
baugh then closed the case for Mr.. Kettel-
lie. The arguments were literally larded
with quotations from decisions and authori-
ties in analogous cases. At the close of
the arguments, Judge Cochran delivered
the following opinion. the main points of
which were taken down by short hand
reporter:
The court has hitherto refrained from
an exercise of curiosity in regard to the
questions involved in the decision of this
case, and from reading any comments up
on the question in the public press. /
| differ from the views of counsel on both
sides IN some respects.
| In the view | take of the law of 1875,
known as the Mayors Bill, )" the first part
of section one provides that the mayors OF
all cities in this state shall have power to
appoint all officers whose election by the
qualified voters is not provided for by law.
Next, | find that this law gives the
mayor power to remove from such offices
all persons filling them.
| II is claiYnad nv onupSa1 For tho rnIa INV
that the mayor has only power to re-
move the officers whom he has appointed,
and this is the construction placed by the
relator S counsel upon this language in the
Mayors Act" And the mayor shall
also have power to remove any officer sc
appointed, whenever, in his opinion, tie
interests Of the city require such removal
ETC.
| think that the act itself simply mean:
that during the year the mayor has a right
to say that any appoin,ee, for reasons
which the interests of the city requires
shall no longer act as city attorney, asking
the city council to approve his action, and
unless by two-tLirds majority, of course
the former officer is not restored to Office
The statute itself gives the mayor the
right to say who, during the interregnum
in order that the office may not be vacant
shall be the proper officer. 1.-THE mayor
may appoint any suitable person to dis
charge the duties of the office, from which
he shall have removed any officer, unit
his successor is appointed and qualified. OF
such officer restored to Office in the manner
aforesaid" That is, in order that th,
Office may not be vacant, the mayor has
right TO say that some suitable person
shall exercise the duties of the office.
Now, the case presented by this informa
ton, with the pleas here, is not such cas-,
as is contemplated strictly by the statute
it is simply whether the term of Office of Mr.
kettelle, as city attorney, has expired b,
law.
The mayor comes into Office, and what
ever may be his reasons, | don't know
is not set out nor is it necessary that thes,
pleas should set out the reasons in tn
mind of the mayor for wanting Mr.. Ket
telle out of office, for that is matter TO
the city council to act upon-but the tern
of Office having expired by limit of law, th
mayor has the right to say his Office ha
expired, and the right to suggest the nam
of his appointee to the city council, and
t the city council has refused to approve hi
appointment, the mayor has the undoubte
right to recognize the office as vacant fo
the time being. otherwise Mr.. Kettelle fc
: instance, Il only use the name as an illus
/ tration) might remain in the Office fittce
or twenty years, while the law provide
that his term of Office shall expire at th
end of one year. unless he is reappointe,
: and gives new bonds; and it don't lie i
the power Of tho city council, by maiorit