The Helena independent. [volume] (Helena, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1890-11-21
THE MAYORS VETO.
Why He Returned the Ordinance without
His Endorsement.

Why He Returned the Ordinance Without
His Endorsement.
HELENA, Mont, Nov. Is.
To the Honorable City Council of the
City of Helena:, return to your honorable
body ordinance No. 50, amending section
!, Of article l, of chapter Nv, of the revised
ordinances of the city, without my ap-
prevail, for the following reasons, to-wit:
l. The ordinance takes away the power
Of removal of police officers from the mayor
and confers the same upon the city council.
Under the ordinance as it now stands, this
power 10 conferred upon the mayor, who 10
authorized to remove any police 0facer
without the assignment Of any rea1on, and
such removal is absolute. This power CON
ferred upon the mayor ! do not think 10
wise or Just to the officers removed. It IL
against the genius of our free institutions
and against the spirit Of our laws to CON-
denim without hearing, and in former
body tho passage of an ordinance oreating
board Of police commissioners, before
whom charges should be preferred against
police officers, where hearing could be
had. and where the removal on the part of
the mayor should only take place whom .
made against the officer. Such q pro-
oedure would give the officer accused an
opportunity to be heard and to defend him
self before he was removed, and still
think that this method, or some other
method containing substantially tho ele-
hearing before his removal upon charges.
10 the only one which should become law
in this city.
The ordinance as passed by your honora-
body, and which herewith return with my
veto, contains this provision: IAN such
moval by the city council.' This is vague
and uncertain. The oity council may re-
move the officer arbitrarily and without
cause, and without hearing, and can rec
no reason for taking this arbitrary power
from the mayor and comforting II upon the
city council. This piece Of legislation, in
Of the case, and is not founded upon the
elementary principles Of justice and right
toward an officer.
It is Questionable upon another ground:
II 10 vague and uncertain. There 10 NC
method Of procedure indicated by which
the council should aot in making the re-
removal be made BY the city council.
Again, an officer might be guilty Of Some
gross violation OF duty that would require
Immediate suspension Of his official funo-
tions. The ordinance should confer the
next meeting Of the council.
2. have another objection to the ordin-
ances e passed By your honorable body.
It abolishes the Office Of city detective. a.
ofilce which deem Of great value to the
city: One OF the main perposes Of the e.
the people of city il their profession in
all their rights Of person and property.
Violations Of laws are often done In secret:
murders, thefts, burRlaries, arsons and
many other Of the more heinous o6enses
known against human Law, are perpetrated
in secret; and 70 have some Officer, Who i
peculiarly fitted, bp his natural ability and
acquired skill BY experience, for ferretting
ont crime, ID IN essential requisite to the
thorough administration Of Justice and the
protection OF the rights u the people In the
am therefore fully persuaded that il il
mot wise to abolish this Office. II appears
from an inspection of the ordinance that as
it was originally drafted, this Office was
provided for, but for some reason unknown
TO myself, il was erased just before il was
put upon it passage.
feel persuaded in my own mind that
upon maturer consideration Of this subject,
your honorable body will agree with me
that it Is not wise to abolish this Office. !
will cheerfuliy approve OF the ordinance a.
passed, with such amendments az will re-
store the oflioe of city detective. and pro-
vide that no appointed officer shall be re-
moved except for cause and after hearing
has been accorded to him. do not deem
it material whether such bearing shall be
made by board Of police commissioners,
as suggested in my former message, Of
whether it is done BY the city council the
essential requisite being that there shall be
hearing by some lawfully constituted trib-
unal before condemnation and removal.
Respectfully submitted.
DONALD BRAD1ozD, Mayor.
Hardly had his honor got seated when
Alderman Connolly arose, his face f1ushed,
and his countenance rud2sd with Q frown.
He asked BY what power eo1ld the eoancil
exercise The FUNSTON suggested in the
WHARF il states that ths city council
shall have power TO resmove ofscers 81 the
city. Than saisinR his voice 70 . hioh
pitch said that hs had been Jumped By tha
mayors leGal adviser, Who insolsntly In
formed him that h vvuA ind ont that the
him n his action Mr.. Connolly then
dvelt upon What h tnrnad fhA