The Austin weekly statesman. (Austin, Tex.) 1883-1898, 1884-06-05
CITY FINES.
RECORDER JOHNS REPEATEDLY
REBUKED BY THE
COUNCIL

! UOUNUlL
! During the first five months of the
existence OF the recorders court, fines
to the amount of S1,629.45 have been
, assessed for carrying and discharging
pistols within the city limits. In
, every instance, the recorder is on
record as having fulfilled his duty.
In most of the offences the highest
fine under the law-$100 and costs
has been assessed, and in no instance
has it been less than $50 and costs.
But the city council have repeatedly
seen fit to rebuke Recorder Johns for
his action in the premises, by remit
ting the fines, or portion of the fines
assessed by him in not only these
cases, but also those growing
out of other offenses. Was
the council in possession of
facts of which the recorder was
ignorant, or was it their itnentlon
merely TO call in question the justice
Of his decision, or were their sympa-
thies played upon by pathetically
worded appeals and pledges of reform?
Everything would seem to Indicate
the latter, since in
THE THEODORE HILLYER CASE
their action in renting four ifths of
his fine on Monday the 10Th inst, was
taken in the face of the county courts
decision on the matter, Hillyer having
| appealed the case to that tribunal.
1t is true that Mayor Saylor
suggested the action, but what of
that? The council is not under OBJ
legations to comply with every sug-
gestion, or even request, of the mayor.
The case must come before them on
Its merits, and the same facts Should
beg presented that were adduced in
both the recorders and county courts.
Special pleas were urged in the case
of Mr.. Hillyer. 1t was not denied
that he and Ben Thompson rode over
the town in a buggy, firing off their
pistols in the very heart of the city,
but it was urged that Mr.. Hillyer was
the victim Of peculiar temptations.
What of that? Wasn't Mr.. Hillyer,
twenty-one years Of age; a
grown man, in his right mind;
and didn't he know the differ
ence between right and wrong? 1t
was also urged that Mr.: Hillyer had
promised to conduct himself differ
emily in the future. What, too, of
that? Isn't it his business to behave
himself? Is the city council under
any obligation to virtually bride a
man to observe the ordinances of the
city? Alderman Croker is on record
in the defense of the law, by manly
speech urging such a precedent be not !
established, and that the action of the
courts be final. This fine-or the
greater portion of twas RENTED by |
the following vote:
Yeas-Pillow, Wells, Underhill,
Mas, Odell, Platt, Erwin, Brush,
Brennen-total 8.
Nays-Hancock, Campbell, Schuber, |
Crooker, Darlington, Hill-total 6.
The same meeting proceeded then
to pursue the same policy with refer
ence to
MIR. IsIDOR. BLODENOUSKI,
who was fined for carrying a pistol, |
with the exception that several mem
bers, disguised at the action of the |
majority in the Hillyer case, receded |
from their good resolution and |
voted for the remission Of |
this fine. 1t was urged,
that Blodenouskis case was worthy |
of favorable consideration on the |
ground that he had no money, had
worked seventeen days on the streets
and was not feeling we'll. THE
STATESMAN and the people of Austin
fail to see what legitimate bearing |
these facts could have on the case.
Again, at the previous meeting of the
council petition was presented by
B. j. CARLISLE,
asking that a similar fine against |
him be RENTED. The council referred |
this back to him in order that it should |
be placed in proper form and present
ed through the mayor, plainly indica-
ting what action could be expected by |
Mr.. Carlisle when the matter was
again brought before the council.
But the council
CLAPPED THE CLIMAX
by its action yesterday afternoon in
remitting the fines imposed against
the six jurymen in the case against
James Burns, for contempt of court
IN resorting to an evasion IN order to
leave the court before verdict was
reached. The circumstances were
these: After the jury had retired and
it became manifest that no agreement
could be reached very shortly, Re
corder Johns instructed that the jury
be kept in charge by bailiff until 8
O'clock at night, unless verdict was
reached before that time; but, in case
of agreement before that time the jury |
hould return sealed verdict and be
discharged.
The following was the result of |
their consultations:
We, the Jury in the case Of the city |
Of Austin vs.. James Burns, charged
with keeping open the doors of his |
saloon on Sunday, do hereby agree to |
disagree.
c. p. Raymond, G. W. Bergman,
n. N. Gammel, G. G. Cramer,
J.Geggie, n. D. Townsend. |
Upon his return, Recorder Johns |
was astonished at this remarkable |
document, and at once ordered that |
the six iurymen be brought back.
They were each fined $40 for con-
tempt Of court, and all re-
turned TO the jury-room to complete |
their consideration of the case. They |
made very short work Of 1t after
that, returning verdict of not guilty. |
The council, at its session yesterday |
afternoon proceeded, as usual, to undo |
the work of the recorder, by promptly
remitting these fines. The right of
the council to remit fines is not ques-
toned, but it is just such action as
this that has made the one
here the but of ridicule, and frequent
ly the laughing stock of the commu-
nifty.
RECORDER JOHNS
being spoken to in regard to the ac-
ton OF the city council in this matter,
said that he regretted that the council
should see proper to pursue such a
policy, as it to some extent placed
him in the attitude of being tyranical
and unjust, while in truth and in fact
he took no pleasure in ining anyone,
but did so in the interest of the quiet,
peace and order of the community.
He further says that, Notwithstanding
the city council may remit fines i'm
posed for carrying and discharging
pistols in the city, it shall have no in
| fiuence upon his action, but that he
will continue as he has began by i'm
posing the highest fines under the law
| for all such offenses.
Recorders Court.