Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1886-08-07
4 Question Raised N to Hts QuallAca.
ton for His Present once,

walker TO Office "a major and superintendent
OF police has been raised, under the law which
provides that mo person shall be appointed "a
policeman or watchman who has not served
received an honorable dischsrge.s Major
walker, Is stated, never served in the army
or navy. The question: Is whether the major
amined BY First Controller Durham. when the
accounts Of The police including the payment
OF Major Walkers salary will come before him
sidered this matter when Major Walker was
appointed, but concluded that the law did not
apply TO the major OF police.
ATTORNEY DAVIS OPINION OF THE Law.
being out of the city, reporter Of THE STAR
asked Mr.. H E. Davis. the assistant attorney,
his views on the subject
Mr.. Davis said: 1.-THE chapter Of the Revised
Statutes Of the United States relating to the
Metropolitan police Is chapter thirteen, PIP.
1891. That chapter Is the reviser's consolida-
ton and arrangement of q number Of acts and
paris OF acts dealing with the subject of the
ponce, and extending over the years from 1881
TO 1873. What is now known as section 340
OF the Revised Statutes. relating 70 the District
respectively in 1851, 1862 and 1886. This
section enumerates those OF whom the police
prises q certain number of privates and q Ger
above the rank Of private. What is now
relating to the District is as follows:
No person shall be appointed to Office, or
hold office In the police force, who cannot read
citizen of the United States, or who shall
ever have been indicted and convicted of
crime; and no person shall be appointed as
policeman or Waterman who has not served in
the army or navy of the United States and re-
cetved an honorable discharge
Down to the semicolon, after the word
'crlme, the provision OF this section Is taken
from section OF the act of 1861 creating the
Metropolitan police. The rest of the section Is
taken from the legislative, executive and judi.
clal appropriation act of March 2, 1857; and
was originally proviso attached to the clause
Of that act which stated the appropriations for
the Metropolitan police. That the word ..po-
liceman' in this provision was not intended to
include the m ajor of the force seems perfectly
clear. In no one OF the acts or parts of ects
Dealing with the force is the major otherwise
spoken OF than as an officer of the force, in the
sense OF one who Is in control or management.
In the original act he was denOminated a SUI
%, 1866, it was provided that the chief execu-
tive officer OF the police shall hereafter be styled
major
On the other hand, what are now known as
privates Were, by the original act, designated
police patrolmen,' the change of designation
TO 'pr nS having been made by the act Of
serve that this act ante-dates the appropriation
act In which the provision in question origin.
ated; and 1t would not seem to admit of doubt
tnat the words policeman or Watchman' were
used in the provision in full memory Of the
clear distinction made by Congress less than
eight months before between the police patrol.
men or 'privateS on the one hand, and the
officers, up to the grade Of major, on the other.
Moreover, the association by the provision in
question OF policeman. with. .watshman'
tentlon or Congress was to restrict appoint
ments or those engaged in ordinary police pa
troll duty to honorably discharged soldiers and
sailors; and 1t placed the same restriction upon
appointments to the analogous, indeed, in
many respects identical. duties Of Waterman.
t was fully aware OF the Importance OF
officer of q police force and OF the able and
prominent men who had occupied the office
elsewhere; and surely it never intended to
tons capital to those who had been in another
branch Of public service and discharged"
Major Walker, 1t is claimed, did not seek the
Office, but accepted it, as he stated, for the pur.
pose OF improving the force. IT is quite imma.
terial to him, 1t is said, whether the decision
the pending question should be adverse to him
or otherwise.
MAJOR WALKERS PREDECESSORS.
Major Richards is of the opinion that the
point raised will not be sustained. for the law
(Sec. 354) provides that no person shall be ap.
pointed TO or hold Office on the force VINO can.
not read, write, &c, and no person shall be ap-
pointed as policeman or Waterman who has
not served In the army or navy, DC, thus max
ing distinction between the officers OF the
force and the men. In other words he concurs
In Commissioner Webb's views.
The army and navy clause was not prescribed
until 1867. The first major was Commissioners
Webb, who organized the force which went
on duty september 18th, 1861. He was
followed by Major A. G. richards December
LIST, 1854, who served till January 2Sth, 1873.
II was during his regime that the clause requir-
Ing an honorable discharge from the army and
navy as to future appointments was enacted.
Though he was not actually in the service, he
was in the company OF employees of the Post
Office formed for all emergency. Major Nor
gan. who succeeded Major Richards, was closely
allied TO the army during the war, being in the
9uartermaster's department in charge of river
transportation. Major Brock, who succeeded
him, mad been in the three months service, but
having been an original appointee, the army
and navy clause could not apply TO his case.
Major Dye had been in the service during the
war, but some claim that when he went into
the service of the khedive of Egypt he virtually
gave up his American citizenship.
WHAT CONTROLLER DURHAM SAYS.
First Controller Durham said today that he
would not decide the question which has arisen
regarding the salary of Major Walker, chief of
police, until it is formally presented to him by
The Commissioners, or until it arises in the
settlement OF the accounts. He Is not
In the habit OF climbing u hill until he reaches
1t, he said.