New-York tribune., 1880-02-08
OPINION OF THE COURT.

reinstatement was complete upon the rendering of
The decision.
OPINION OF THE COURT.
ur NICHOLS NOT ACCORDED A HEARING TO WHICH
HE WAS ENTILED-THE JUDGMENT OF THE
MAYOR REVERSED.
Justice Lawrence in his opinion says: " On
the day on which argued before me, the
Court of Appeals the appeal taken by this rclator
,rom an order Ct the General Term Of this department
granting writ Of prohibition against the Special Term,
rendered decision reversing the order OF the General
Term The opinion of the Court OF Appeals was con-
.urred in is stated by all the Judges OF the Court
md It must be followed decisive of the law of this
,aSe" After quoting at length from the opinion OF the
Court Of Appeals to show the reasoning by which they
arrive conclusion that the proceeding is Judicial
It's character, and necessary consequences Is sub
review by writ of certiorari issued by the SUI
reme Court in the OF Its experimenting
over inferior tribunals aud persons exercising judicial
.uncuons," Justice Lawrence continues:
THE MAYORS POWER JUDICIAL
"The definition Of the power OF the Mayor and OF the
Of that power will render It unnecessary for me
10 consider of the questions which were so forc
bly, and thoroughly discussed ny the learned counsel for
the respective parties upon the hearing The Court of
last resort have authorltatively declared that the
Mayors power IL udicial that bis Judgment upon the
question of removing Police Commissioner is subject
To review this Court eertOrari and that the ac-
cnsed official has the right 10 know what the specific
be proved and that the defendant should be permitted
crossexamiDe witnesses and TO call witnesses on his
sented by counsel II the return Of the Mayor the
writ shows that In all or any OF these particulars tue re-
lator in this proceeding denied hls rights, 1t follows
necessarily that the Mayors proceedings must be re-
yersed and his decision declared to be null and void.
BY the of the Mayor to the writ it appears
that on the 14th day of March, 1879 ne addressed 10
the reat9e s nt sod tbe nSseoeot nroceednss
In the matter before the Mayor " From TINS" the
Court continues il appears that although the elator
af tande
HIM that he should be permitted to spek tnEough ms ms
charges which contained in the of
March Ia 1879 are OF general nature ana no distinct
ery cleaned of the particulars OF the alleged negligence
dssensons which precuded the restor from the proper
of the Official trust which he mad assumed nor
OF the alleged conduct OF the reatOr winch decided
by the Mayor TO be unbecoming the office OF a Peace
Commissioner
PROOF OF GUILT WANTING.
"The charges, If they can be regarded rs sufi-
cienty specific to warrant the Mayor in making them
the basis OF proceeding for the removal of the reator
should in the language OF the Court Of Appeals in their
opinion uuless admitted, have been proven to be true
The charges most emphatically denied by the re-
lator as shown by the extracts ron tne return %ca
In their support The Mayor did. 1t Is true. after re-
H. tnrnishsd with specifcations Of the charges against
him put this question to the relator; DO you know
TO the Battery, was on the 18TH of MarchP and
also stated, Il have many other places that am
whether merely an illustration, and " yOu answer
this will ask with respect to good many others
Il Will take West Thirty ysecondst. on the same day
you acquainted with ITS conditonF 10 these ques
lions ane ~ he cbarses that he holds If any
me, and VIII allow me reasonable time to reply
having admitted the charges entitled 10 have them
proven Ii was not his duty to make an admlsson
which would relieve the May OF from making that PROOF
which the charter required He coud not be compelled
by of the Intermediates addressed to MN to
shift the burhen OF proof, SO tnht lhsteau Oh beihs
proven be guilty he would be Obliged to prove his
"Again the return shows that the Mayor acting
either on ais own knowledge of the condition OF the
he had derived from other PARTIES If he acted upon the
informatioD given him by Others under the PROVISIONS
the reator emitted to be confronted with MS ae
and to cross-examno them And II the May9r m is
made upon his own knowledge he stood ID the proceed
crossexamination To the distinct question put TO him
by rcaor whether he was prepaled to be cross
ahmed tbe Mayur replied IN the negative. Under TINS
state OF facts cut how it can be claimed
that the reletor bad an opportunity 10 DC heac WITHIN
which the proceedings for his removal were Instituted
THE JUDGMENT RENDERED
Commenting upon the letter OF Mayor Cooper stating
that he would receive further statement eXplana
ton or argument" from Ieator, Justice Lawrence
SAYS: 1t will be observed from this communication
that the Mayor had. the proceedings already taken
before him, determined TO remove the relator That
proceeding afforded ground for the REALTORS removal
for the above stated and yet unless the reator
hmsca, he was informed tbat on the Ie-
cord thus made II the record remained unchanged,
certificate OF mis- removal from Office would be trans
mit.ed 10 the Governor This was again ang upon the
reator prove himself innocent of CHARGES OF which
he had not 10 be guilty, ana again shifting
the Durtken OF proof from the aceusr TO the accused
The Justice forth the reply OF Mr. Nichols ana The
fact that the Mayor transmitted certificate OF the
latoI's removal from office TO the Governor. am OF
SHAVING thar the reator was OPPORTUNITY
being heard as provided by the CHARTER, distinctly
shows portunity las denied to him. and u'
less therefore. the wrt should be dismissed or quashS
for the reasons stated 10y the learned cOunee lOr the
Mayor Judgment should be rendered that the proceed
ings be reversed" ,...,,.
are examined IN order aud oyerrued Justice Lawrence
holding that decision of the Court or Appeals has
settled question adversely to me Mayor In con
cusIon the Court Lastly, with the opinion OF tne
Sur of ApueaIs referred 20 before me,
not avoid the conclusion that the reatOr ava not nave
such bearing before Mayor The 25th section OF
should be rendered that the proceedings Tor me re0a
OF the reator be all respects reversed and set aside
the rclaior be reIstated III Inc once Oi fOce
Commissioner. Judgment accordingly
MR. NICHOLS RESUMES HIS SEAT.
HIS RECOGNITION As A MEMBER or THE POLICE
BOARD BY THE TWO REPUBLICAN cOMMIs-
sIoNKRs.
Commissioners French and Wheeler heard
OF the decision rendered by Justice Lawrence while
downtown at noon, and immediately telegraphed 10
Police HEADQUARTERS to learn II Commissioner VoorDis
was in the building The answer was that he was there
M MacI.eaa had left his Office earlier in the day Mr
Wheeler then sent TO Commissioner WORMS
asking him 10 stay until himself and Mr. French could
return When they arrived they found, however, that
he had gone away.
simultaneously with the the first news OF the decision