The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1888-04-21
PLACES OF PUBLIC TRUST
The Common Law Against Removal of
officers for Political Purposes.
The Civil-Service Phase Of the Suit Relative
TO the Insane Hospital Trustees Sus-
tanned By Many High Authorities.

A point of much interest to civ1l-seTVice re-
formers, as well as TO those who desire 10 SEQ
proper administration of eur puoils suairs' %
raised by the fourth paragraph OF the con-
plant against DIR. Harrison, to when oeHuI-
rer was filed ard argued ON Friday OF last wees
before the three justices 0f the Superior court
This paragraph. which Mr.. Spaan. in his argu-
mann. allnded to as the -'cvil-service para
crApn.s alleged that the trustees of the Insane
Ho.nitaI. for the purpose of promoting their
personal and party interests, without regard to
the welfare Of the patients, removed from the
institution, and required the superintendent to
remove all employees except bose who belonged
20 their own party, and thus caused the dismis-
sal of many ft. competent and merltorious en-
ployes, who were properly performing their
duties for no other than beca use such per-
sons did not belong to their political party.
and the trustees caused to be substituted per-
Sons in political accord with them and persons
who had performed political and personal services
for ehern and persons recommended by 1nnu-
entail members of their party for political rea-
sons aud that such appointments were made
without reference TO the fitness Of the appoint
ees to discharge the duties OF the positions to
which they were appointed; tina: the trustees
caused many msritorious employees to be dis
charged for the mere purpose of putting IN their
places those in political accord with them, and
those who had rendered political services to
them, wholly Irrespective Of the fitness OF the
substitutes to render the services required or
them; that Dr. Harrison caused 1t to De pnohcly
announced that persons would DC appointed
in the hospital except those who belonged 20 ms
party, and thereby prevented many MT persons
from applying; that by reason OF this political
manipulation of the asylum. many negligent,
careless. brutal and incompetent attendants ana
other persons employed. by whom the pa
tients were mistre and abused
In the argument of this question, on behalf or
the State. MIR Fouike fclaimed that inasmuch
as the Office of trustee was public trust for tbs
beneAt of the insane, IL was the duty OF the
trustees to cause the appointment OF those who
were most fit TO perform the duty required OF
them-namely, TO take care OF the insane:
and wholly without reference TO their political
value service, and If they discharged meritorl-
men for purely political reasons, or ep-
pointed those who were unworthy or unfit
wholly without reference to their qualifications,
FOR political reasons. they violated their duty
and were liable to be removed. 1t was claimed
that the proceeding was In the nature of a sub
stitute for impeachment, and this was conceded
in tho argument Oy Mr. Span,
Many precedents were cItedr both In England
and America, among the most important being
the following: Coke's Institutes. VOL o. D. 53-
Hugh Spencer, the father; Lord Spencer. Earl
of Winchester, and the Kings Chamberlain. and
Hugh, his son, Earl of Gloc, were adjudged in
Parliament to be exiled, etc. Amongst other |
and covetousness to the disinheritance of the |
great men Of the realm. and destructio OF the |
people put out good and covenable ministers |
which had their places by assent, and put In
Others false and evil of their GOWN, that they |
should not cause right to be done. Comyn's |
Digest, Tit Parliament. l.. 70 to 40-The
Spencers were impeached for that they put good |
m agistretos out of office and advanced |
bad" citing 4 Coks's Institutes, 53. Story on |
the Constitution, Speaking of impeachments at
common law, Section 800, Eays: Others. again. |
were founded in the most sanitary public justice. |
such as impsachments for malversations and
neGlects In Office, for encouraging pirates. for |
ofa md an
especially for putting good magistrates out or |
Office and advancing bad" The President ID |
Is Am. Law Reg, 652; Elliotts Debates. 35l, |
or for removal OF good men from Office. 10 Am. |
Law Reg. 649
In Rex VS. williams t3 Burr. 1917 an opinion |
was granted by the court agaiAst the defendant, |
as Justice of the peace for the burrough OF PEN
ryn. for refusing TO grant licenses to those pub
licans who voted against their Recommendation
of candidates for members of Parliament for
that burroueh. Is appeared that they had acted
very grossly in this matter. having previously
threatened 10 ruin these people, by
not granting them licenses. IN case they
should vote against those candidates whose in |
terest those Justices themselves ospoused; and |
afterwards actually refusiE q them licenses. upon
this account only. And Lord Mansfield declared |
tn at the court granted this opinion against the
license (which they had discretion to grant |
or refuse they should ses to be right and |
properl but for the corrupt motive of such re- /
fusal-if they oppressive and uujuat-by re- /
ing for them would not give their votes for |
members Of Parliament 1he justices would /
have had them. If the justices Of the peace
wilfully abuse their discretion in granting or
refusing licenses 70 sell ale, it Ia criminal. Rex
VS.. Williams, 3 Burr. 1917 The license in this
case had also been refused because the persons
applying for them would not give their votes for
members of Parliament the justices would
have them. Trek, vs. Hamm., III. l7l6, 1861
In $780, Mr.. Madison, in the debates on the
Constitution. said, THE President is i'm peach
able for the wanton removal of meritorious
offcers (ElliOtts Debates. Vol. !, pags $50
404 In addition to the foregoing authorities.
which based upon common and parliament
airy law, there is an old English statute which
be came part of the common law of this State.
1t reads thus: None shatl obtain Office by suit |
or for reward, but by desert" Another statute |
compelled all the chief officers to swear that
they would ordain. name or make any off,
GERS of the King for any gift of brokerage,
favor or affection" The fact that these CON-
law PRINCIPLES have often been violated in
practice does not render them obsolete. and it is
m ain tain ed that they are still the common law
In this country and in this State. well as of
England.
COy's Place in Council.
A epecial meeting of thai Council has bean |