The Daily times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1886-1889, 1889-06-29

4
Pubiic Interests
Sir.-You informed me that Mr.. John
S. Elicit. who was nominated to the
Citv Council by the Board of Public
Interests. az one of the three "LeIsons
from whom the Council shall elect "a
member OF the Board of Fire Commits
sioners. has notified YOU iu writing. tnat
he does not wish his name to be submit
ted to the Council. and tina; be Will not
under any circumstances accept the pc
sition. if elected. Having so informed
me. YOU requested my opinion as to
what course you. as president OF the
Board Of Public Interests. should Dur-
sue. i'm order that the Council might
have the opportunity, as required by
law. TO select fire commissioner from
three persons.
The present Board Of Fire Commits
sioners was created by the Act OF As
sembly of February %. 1858. See acts
1887 IS. p. 231. In the first section oil
that act duty was imposed upon the
Board Of Public Interests IN the follow
iug words:
1T shall then be the duty Of SAID
Board of Public Interests TO nominate
by ciUq UOce vote (which shall be re-
corded on their minutes. and a copy
certified with their nominations to the
Joint meeting OF the CouuciD. three per
sons residing in each ward for which
any fire commissioner is TO be elected.
which persons shall be yO els IN SAID
city. and shall hold no oiiicc. munici-
pal, State or Federal. and the names of
these persons shall be certified by the
president Of the Board OF Public Inter-
ests. with the recorded vote nominating
them as aforesaid, t. the Council in
Joint session. as the persons from whom
the Council shall elect the member OF
members OF said Board of Fire Com
missioners. aud the Council shall elect
one fire commissioner for ward from
the three names certified to 1t from that
ward by the president of the Board OF
Public Interests as aforesaid.
II is manifest from the above extract.
that the Legislature intended to require
that there should be three persons
from whom the Council shall elect the
member of said Board of Fire Commits
siOners. Ii is equally as certain tina. the
Legislature did not intend that the
nominations might consist Of TWO
persons. who would serve, aud one per
son, whom it was known, would not
serve. Otherwise IL was useless IN the
Legislature to require that the Board
of Public Interests should nominate by
riUd U0ce vote three persons" Ii would
have only required that trO persons
should be nominated. If the Board OF
Public Interests has the right to send
to the Council the names Of three per
sons. one of whom the Board knows
will not act, it has an equal right To
send the names Of three persons, two
of whom the Board may know Will moi
act. Should IL pursue the latter cOul St..
il would destroy the right Of choice
contemplated and commanded by The
statute. In other words. IL would be
uullifyIng the act creating the Board
of Fire Commissioners which Board
has no right TO exist except IN accord
ance with the requirements OF said act.
Such course would be fraught with
danger, for it would engender and en-
courage the fraudulent combinations
which the act was passed to prevent.
IL would be n0 sufli lent answer to
say that the Council could elect the
person who would not serve, and after
his declination.snew nominations could
be made. In the first place the Legs
laturo did not intend to force the Coun-
ell. IN order for 1t TO preserve its right
of choice, TO vote for one who. it was
known, would not serve. IN the
second place, it is highly improbable
that the Council would be so careful Of
its prer0gative. 1t Is far more likely
that, if during the joint session mem
Der should state that one of the persons
nominated would not serve the Council
would proceed to choose between the
two remaining persons, although
neither of the two others might bo the
first choice Of a majority of the mem
bers of either branch OF the Council.
The Legislature intended that the
Council should have right of choice
between three persons. any one Of
whom. it was presumed. would serve
il elected. Such being the intent, any.
thing that would prevent the required
choice would be against the purpose
and the spirit of the act.
IL is true that the act provides that
when ANY person elected declines 10
act, ~ the Board of Public Interests
shall nominate three other persons,
from WHOM the Council shall select one.
But that provision was not intended 90
authorize the nomination or the
sending to the Council of the names Of
persons who it was known would not
act. 1t was intended To prescribe the
course To be pursued. where an unfOre-
seen result happened.
Ii it should have happened that all
three of the persons nominated by the
Board Of Public Interests. At its last
should have written to you.
stating that they did not desire their
respective names TO be submitted 90
the Council. and that he, who should.
be elected, would. under no circum-
stances, serve. can it be contended that |
it would still be your duty to present /
The names 70 a JOINT meeting of the I
.wo branches of the Council, called to /
elect fire commissioner
Such a course would not be a per-
'Ormance Of COVER mental duties. but
)uerile. IL you ougnt not to pursue
'uch cour e. when each Of the three
lotify you that he viii not serve if
elected, what rIgni have you to pursue
uch course. should two of the three
erve such notice upon you. In either
ase would the Council have the statu-
DRY right vi choice, should one of
hem 50 notify you. The Council would I
ave choice, but the choice would be
etween two. and not three persons
From the above considerations | am
( opinion that il is your duty to call
ieeting of the Board of Public Inter !
SITS, and TO notify said board Of the Z