Seattle daily post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, W.T. [Wash.]) 1881-1888, 1885-06-04
esFycIl rRarrEnrxes
ssEHessRaaa NsEahup Rekfxna-The
WseteEy Impeachment Trtai
Gammsemfesf

~@@ANaHaAa s&F1nWp &ssfGnA-Hke
Asslery Impeachment Trtai
Commenced.
Coa.e4l net last evening pursuant TO
soto2rru1sns- Prsssrt-His Homer tue
Mayor John LsAry. and Gszaeiimen
rye. HsrE1Egtou, Snyder, Sex YesieT.
LatlUeF, Rsnshsrt and CEpckesf.
O.dsxed taas tie resignation Of C0nn-
eii@aa A0rfhrp De taken fron the ia
DE, and that the resignation of said
Councilman from the Third ward be ae-
csptsd.
Ordered that Fred z. Sanders sszess-
nett De raised $50
Ordered that certain pfopAx.y assessed
% +. D. NhitWorth be stricken from the
assessment roll
Application Of Jasaea W. Saith for a
retail license was presented aud referred
20 license committee
OrdsFsd that the CoaueiI proceed with
tie invest CATION Of the articles fer the
uKPnACHAEgT
OF James ID WooIesy, Chief of Po-
lice.
Ex- Chief Juzsissss Orange Jacobs and
j. Z. Lewis appeared as attorneys for
Mr.. Noolery. and were invited within
the bar.
Judge Lewis opened the case By say
ing thai he had tseen about the Council
very seldom, and hzd almost withdrawn
from the trial OF ca1ses, bat as this Is
a very important matter. be thought Il
meet and proper to appear as attorney
for Mr.. " eolslry. Our client when fsst
accused entered a plea of not guilty.
There are soEae important questions of
law involved il this ease, and If the
CouRcil Is so minded. We will withdraw
oar plea of not guilty, II order to settle
these questions Of Law, and ceadense if
possible these charges.
City Attorney--It is for the Council to
say whether the charges mey be with
drawn or not.
Permission granted, and plea With
drawn.
Lewis-I would state that this prose
sution il broaeht'urder section OF tke
charter which authorizes the Council
to remove the Chief of Police for
cause.
The first article, accusing him Of re-
fusing 10 make complaint against
Myers d Powers for selling liquor with
out license, does not accuse him of
violating any law.
Article second. accusing him of re-
fusing to make q sworn complaint
against those parties when requested to
do 50 by the City Attorney, is open 10
the same Digestion.
Article third, accusing him Of q vio-
lation of section "a of the city charter,
in not keeping a record of the arrests
made in the city, Is very indefinite, but
We would just as soon go to trial on
that as not.
Article four charges him with the
neglect of no duty.
Article five, which accuses him of
negieetiug to arrest, or cause to be ar
rested, certain unlicensed saloon keep
ers, charges no otfenise whatever, which
We will claim.
Article sixth, accusing him of failure
to enforce the dog ordinance, We are
willing to answer.
One of these charges is that the
Chief refused 10 file I'm information be-
fore the City Attorney against Myers i
Powers, as directed by the Mayor.
say the Mayor had no right 70 direct
the Chief to do any such thing, and the
Chief had no business to do it, am a
Law and Order man and an Apple Or
charder, and I'll discuss this subject
fairly"
The Judge then argued that il was
the dutY of Sheriffa and Constables to
make sueh complaints, and not the
Chief of Police, who, as he termed il,
is peace officer"
The Judge continued: 81 defy the
City Attorney to find any Law to com
pei the Chief Of Police to look 30 the
enforcement Of any Territorial Law.
He is to look after the enforcement of
the city ordinances. He has power to
arrest parties anywhere in the county
without n warraat, but the offence must
be committed in the city. | would like
10 kaow where Your Honor received his
authority to direct the Chief to make
complaint against the violators of the
Territorial law. The Chief of Police is
chief of his office; the Mayor ia chief of
the city; every man Is chief OF himself.
| am for law and order, and il is a
dangerous thing to assume authority.
While On the bench / never as
sumed any authority Intentionally, nor
never stretched nay authority further
than to burn few mad houses. There
is hQht going ON in shis city, and in
this fight the Law and order party is
going 10 win, and the laws are going to
be enforced. You must treat the Chief
of Police as you would treat Ine, or any
body else. This whole thing grows ont
Of the question whether the saloons
shall obey the laws as other cisizsns, or
not. think this impeachment trial is
a mistake. In four weeks we will have
&n election, when the people will rise in
their might and settle this matter.
Il ia not charged here that the
Chief knowingly violated any Law.
think the dog Law 10 unconstitutional,
and am sure this Council will not i'm
peach the Chief for not iuapoanding
Cur, unless the unlicensed dog has
been pointed out TO the Chief and he
has doogedly refused to impoand him.
How many policemen have you got ?
dare say bali dozen. The Aaw makes
it the dnty of police officers TO visit
saloons on Sunday aud on special
election days, and report Violate M { Z
the keepers thereof. | used 10 be sur
prised when ON the bench that gam
bling houses and squAw hroshais could
be running At full blast on every hand.
and that sue police officers. sberiffs and
coussables never found 10 out or seemed
20 know what was going on. We think
the only charges We need TO answer are
about dogs and not keeping records. :"
The Jpdge then moved to quash all but
those two charges.
City Atasri ey Hanford then answered
Judge Lewis's objections oEse By one,
carefully and fully, and the Council re-
fused, by a unanimous vote. to Quash
any part Of the charges. The Chief
then entered plea Of not gailty TO all
the articles OF impeachment, and the
a -