Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1879-07-09
CITY LAWS.
WANTED. A CLEAR CONSTRUCTION.
Is the Municipal Judge a Justice 2-what
the City Solicitor Thinks-The Ped
ding Ordinance and Its En-
forcement.

u,
OF West Virginia, and from the contin-
ual enquiries and differences OF opinion
extant. the ordinances OF the city OF
Wheeling must be in condition almost
parallel A remark recently made by
one of our city statesmen contained at
least kernel OF sense in its chat:
Council ought to 60 to work and burn
every ordinance in existence and
re-Ordain what are necessary for the
citv's good government" A great part
of the difficulty is ocCasioned by the
loose manner in which the ordinances
are kept, and it was wise move OF
Council to order a complete revision OF
the mass.
There has been no little talk occasion
ed lately over what was termed trying
a man twice for the same offence" or
after Furnishing him at the Police Court,
turning him over to the State authorl-
ties. The question was raised whether,
under the eighth section of the Act,
forming our Municipal Court, the Judge
could not act as a Justice and prevent
this doubling up OF cases. The matter
came up in Council and was referred to
the City Solicitor fora report. That Off
Ger has had the matter under considera
ton, and last night delivered his opinion
as follows:
In response to the resolution of Coun-
Gil calling upon me 10 report what &C
ton is necessary TO require the Judge OF
the Municipal Court 10 act in accord
ance with the intent of the Sth section
of the act establishing said court, have
the honor TO report that the said Sth
section simply says that the said
Court" mot judge "shall also, within
the city, have the same jurisdiction and
powers as Justice within his county,
in relation to the apprehension, exami-
nation, commitment, or admitting to
bail, OF any person charged with a Grim
| inal offense whether committed in said
city or elsewhere; and in the exercise OF
| such jurisdiction and powers shall be
| subjected to the same regulations
The 44th section of the ordinance on
offenses. MS it has been for some years,
seeks to extend this jurisdiction, and
make it the duty of the court
where the evidence in a case before it
under the 4lst, 42d or 43d sections
thereof, discloses that a felony has been
committed by the accused, to proceed UNI
der the authority conferred upon said
court by the eighth section of the act es-
tablishing said court.
Until my attention was especially
called to this matter by the resolution
calling for this opinion, i. supposed the
ordinance was at least sufficient, in con-
nection with the said eighth section, to
authorize the Court, in case on hearing
before it, under its ordinary police ju-
risdictiOn, to remand party to Jail for
trial at the Circuit Court where the EVIL
dence disclosed felony, but on exami-
nation am satisfied that such is not
the case. The jurisdiction, under the
eighth section, given to the Municipal
Court is the same as Justice has for
the apprehension, examination, &c,
"of ana person charged nth criminal Of
tense" and the eighth section says that
| the Court, ''in the exercise OF such ju-
risdiction and powers, shall be subject
to the same regulations"
When persons are charged before
| Justices with the commission OF offenses
against the State, the law requires
| Except when the ofiense is committed
within view acknowledge of the officers)
| that the proceeding shall be by war
rant OF arrest in the name OF the State,
| issued on information under oath,
| which warrant must describe the
| offense, &c.
The act establishing the Municipal
| Court provides in section Z, that where
any fine, penalty, or punishment may
| lawfully be imposed for violation OF
an ordinance OF the city, the proceed
ings shall be by summons on behalf
of the city, as plaintiff, and snail con-
form to the regulations, as far as they
are applicable, respecting civil suits be-
fore Justices.
1t is clear, then, that the Sth section
is not applicable in a case where
the defendant has been called upon
merely to answer the city as a
plaintiff for q violation OF Il provision OF
! its ordinances. II person should be
charged with a criminal offence" be-
! fore the Police Court in pursuance OF
the laws and regulations applicable to
! similar cases before Justices, case
would be presented where | think the
court would have jurisdiction.
cannot, however suggest any course
on the part of Council that would he
competent to require the Judge to act in
accordance with this or any other view
in relation to said Sth section.
Respectfully,
WM. ERsKTSE,
City Solicitor.
Another question that has greatly
agitated the public mind was the ordi-
nance in relation to hawking and ped
| ding goods about the streets and in the
markets. Especially has notice been
| called to the latter place, by citizens OF
| the Second ward, in communications
! 10 the city press and petitions TO
| Council. Last night resolution was
| adopted instructng the Sergeant TO
| enforce the law. But with the several
constructions placed upon the ordinance
| in relation thereto, what is To be done.
! Alleged violators are picked up and
! brought before the police court, but
| Judge Cranmer rules that any person
| doing business in store or room has
| the authority TO peddle on the streets.
This ruling is freely criticized and re-
| suits i'm a dead lock between Judge and
| officers. The ordinance is as follows:
1t shall be unlawful for any person or
persons TO offer for sale in any street,
lane, alley, public landing, or market
space of the city, any goods, wares or
merchandise, without first having OBJ
tanned license from the Council.
It shall be the duty Of the City Clerk
to number all licenses granted 10 ped
dlers and hawkers and issue the same
on receiving from the applicant the
| Treasurer's receipt tor such amount OF
tax as Council may from time 10 time
determine, and the payment of his
usual fees; Prorided, That nothing in
this ordinance or in the license granted
shall be so construed as 20 entitle any
person to the privilege OF occupying
stand in the market houses or spaces or
the streets, alleys, DC, or Othsr,rise; and
every person offending against the pro-
visions OF this ordinance shall, for each
offense, forfeit and pay TO the city fine
of not less than five nor more than
twenty dollars and costs.
Without comment or opinion we pre-
sent the views and statements as We
hear them. A Second warder COM
plains of unlawful selling in the market,