New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-05-26
THE COURTS.
rvc1sr COMMISSIONERS TO GO FREE.

,.,c,, nxcp,u,N pEGRFTs 1T, BUT HIS HANDS
HAVE BEtN TIED BY TIE NEW LAW
Excise Commissioners Alexander Meahm, Joseph
Koch and Edward r. Fitzpatrick have hhaiN 'S''p''
ALI punishment for their wrongd0ng amer 'her o'
have dragged along In the courts for nearly two years
,,i Ipgrabon in thc Court q oyer and Tcrmlnier.
,.s,or,ov handed down n decision sustaining the dc-
murrer 10 the indictments which was iiH'rp'"u W
OK Iudge Dntenhoefrr. counsel for the 'ohs oe's'
and this decision doubt settles the cases ior 2''
In his opinion sustaining the demurrer Justice s'o"'
says
.The defendants were indicted for wiifn neglect
IN perform the duties imposed npon them as the boar
80 rxcisc in thc city Of NcwiOrk by Section Of
(bon,er $40 Of the laws Of 1873. rs amended by sec
tiou Of Chapter f49 Of the laws of le'o. the lnd"-
gar having been fled on The sh Of April, leol'
ain MAY 1892. an act passed by the Legs
lanire whereby section Of the laws Oh 1910 was
amended there being no provision in the act except
ing from lis operation crimes committed or ihuc'c"'S
found prior 10 the date Of It's passage
at is clear that by this act Of 1899 the "eiSa'"fe
intended 70 substitute new system for the revoca
tion If licenses What might be defence under the
old act would not De under the new. IL scelS' the'F
fore that by the passage OF the new ~t t''c WIS
an express repeal Of the old net within the rs a'
later statute covering the subject matter ana EN-
bracing new provisions operates to rep"ai TIE Pr'or
act although the two acts not In express terms
rcpugnant' People Jaehne. 1913 y. \. 100.
at follows that the act in force at the time 'h''
Indictment was found Is repealed, and there Is no
law now in existence which madc 1t the dn'v Oh '"r
defendants TO entertain and determine the charHc spci
fed in the indictment In January and February ioDo'
Before there could be conviction violhhoh vi "'o
provisions Of the act IT l502 must bc passed
But the defendants cannot be convicted uhucr '''
proyors Of the act Of 1892. because as 10 ohehccs
committed prior to i's passage II is cx post ac'o ana
IL Is thus beyond the power OF the Legislature 10 pro
vide that II should include offences committed prior 10
It's passage. -,
II see no escape from the conclusion that by me
repca of the act of 1873 this indictment must la'''
regret TO be compelled come TO this conciuSon as
IS extremely unfortunate that these Defendants can
escape the responsibility for their acts without 'r"'
and this case well illustrates the danger OF n'ucs
II laws bv the legislature nj the request Oh pnTIIou
individuals 10 meet particular cases bn' wn're ,l
object sought to be- accomplished Is so cohccaeu l.as
the real effect If the passage Of The "a" wa "'c'
considered by the Legislature. for II can huF " sup
posed that the Legs Azure would have lncnuOhay n
acted that n person under nm Indictment i'r rIII
against The state by legislative art shoud Dc icN''
from all rs I,ons lbility without a trial 49,,
am consir mined. however. for The reasons S,'',
10 sustain the demurrer and order Judgment Tor dcieiu
ants