New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1892-06-12
SHIELD FOR LAW-BREAKERS.
HELD UP By THE LEGISLATURE.
nav r,MNANY SUCCEEDED IN SAVING THE kA'
usE COMMISSIONERS.

nav TANNANY SCCOEEDED IN SANiN" lhc Ia
CsE COMMISSIONERS.
or all Of tho outrages which have been pcrpe'"'eu
an this long suffering community IN many dNA y.
rummany Hall and its minisus the legislative pur'"
cation Of the Excise Commissioners Alexander he'"""
EDWARD T. Fitzpatrick and joseph Koch appears 10
IA among the wort As time goes on and the lac''
coma 70 be moro clearly understood the more a0n"S
the whole busincss seems. The history Of TINS case
ourh, 10 60 on record with those Of the MaynaV
scandal the state census frauds and score oil o'her
outrsges In rounding ont a year OF Dcn'"cia"c NM
government In this state which has strong navor
OF Tweed and his gang.
Honesty had evidently become an unknown quantity
In the Office of the Excise Commissioners III u'c
fall OF 1880, when Richard W. e. Wellington d
member OF the CITY Reform Club secured mus
puable evidence Of the violation OF the EXCISE laws w
a man named Ahrens. ny keeping his place open on
Election Day. November s. 1889, between the hours
Of and y. m TINS was o'N
one Of many. but 10 make TEST case Oh ]"
Mr.. willing made complaint in writing TO the hNc''c
Board charging Ahrens with violation OF the EXCISE
laws This complaint was pigeonhofci by the Board
and nothing was heard from II for months In spite
Of the frequent inquiries by members OF the reform
Club Finally. becoming indignant and exasperat"i
a, IN. DELAY they decided 10 see II the Commissioners
coua not be brought down from the dctatorai posi-
ton which they had assumed, and an applcauoh
vac msde 10 the Supreme Court for mandamrs
10 COMPEL the Commissioners. 10 act upon the ease
The mandamns was granted by the supreme Court
but sppcals were taken until the finally reached
the Court OF Appeals. The highest tribunal IN the
state affirmed the decisioa Of the lower conrt and
declared that the failure Of the Commissioners 10
decide the question brought before them constituted
wilful neglect OF duty. api the court put It's seni
Of approval the mandamus TO compel these
vutative public servants 10 do their duty. After
-, e Ia nofn unh
Justified in taking morc severe steps, and on their
complaint an Indictment fouud against the Com
uissIcners under Section III. Of tho Penal Code.
which among ether things. provides that "a public
officer or person holding Isblic trust employment
upon whom any duty is cnjoined By law who wllfuly
ccgleCts TO perform the duty. Is guilty. Of mis-
demcancr"
This section defined the offence of which they were
rtli. hut the law prescribing their duty. and on
which tie whole case was founded. Section z, of
the Laws of 1873, amending Acts Of 1870 and 1897.
This section read as follows:
NAny conviction for The violation OF anv provision
Of this act. or the acts hereby amended bv any
person persons licensed or at any placed licensed
ss herein provided shall forfeit and annul such
license The Board OF Excise OF any city, town or
village may at any time. and upon the complaint OF
any resident OF said city, town or village shell
summon before them any person persons a. afore
said and II they shall become satisfied that any such
person persons has Or have violated any OF the
provisions of this act, Of the acts hereby amended
they shall revoke. cancel and annul the license OF
such person or persons, which they are hereby en-
powered 70 do. and whore necessary 10 enter upon
the premises md take possession of and cancel such
licenses. Upon an inquiry, the said board or the
party complained Of may summon, and the board
my compel the attendance Of witnesses before them
under eath.'
The Indictment under these laws was found on
June 10, 1900 and the came up in the Court
Of General Sessions The commissioners were charged
In the Indictment with having neglected their duty
in not deciding within reasonable time complaint
before them against Ahrens for selling liluor I'm VIC
la,ion of law Election Day. soon after the ind
ing Of the Indictment the counsel for tho commits
sioners, cx-Judge Dttcnhoefer. Richard :. Ncwcombe
AID Edgar VI. Johnson moved TO dUash the
Indictment The motion did not como on for
argument for several months and II was finally heard
by Judge Marine. After holding the case under adj
vsensnt for long time Judge Marine denied 1t In
Written opinion.
Owing 10 the numerous delays however. the trial
wsi not begun until some time in March, 1891, when
Etcsrdcr Smyth took UP tho cnse. II had not gone
far when the fact discovered that the Indictment
was detect e. technically In charging that The nc1'c
bad baen iss,,ed by the defendants as c"nins ~cncr
when In fact Il had been issncd by he'r predecessors
in oiFce. The Recorder qua'hei the Indictment on
*. y-,ubd Of variance between The proof ard the
,rd,ctmen New indictments found IN the Court
81 Over and TerTniner IN April, 1901 and The cases
werc brought up for tial before Presiding Jul tee Van
Brunt.
A plea was there. interposed thai the defendants
could not be tried this second Indictment as they
had been once in jeopardy and acquitted IN inc court
4 General Sessions justice Van Drunt directed a
srdict against the commissioners. 0vciFnlhs '"'ir
plea, but as he considered the question Of some I'M
o.,,ncs he made an order arrcs,.ng judgment and
az further prceeings TO enable the defendants 10
spaal 70 The General Term OF the SUI
vne Court. In June, 1891, The appear
,s heard az the General Term and ha'
tribunal after holding the ca-e under a1Viscmen, lo'
xon,e time decided against the commissioners ara re-
versed the order arrosting judgment From the ue-
clsion Of The General Term an appeal was taEeh 70
the Court OF Appeals. The argument was heald Ia
that court in March, 1892 The Court OF Appeals
decided that under the Code Of Civil Procedure the
Commissioners had right to appeal from an order
reversing an order arres,'' Judgment and on that
around disup g ed the appcsl
At this Is, 30 Of the game the sky began to look
stormy for the commissioners and honest people iohd
,mactned tina, hey saw the doors Of the pcnitenary
sy,ncing open L. receive these decrs Of the law ana
public opinion, they seemed 10 DO at the end OF
Their rop. as the highest oou'. in the state had de,
cided against them. The people who thought TINS uli
not reckon however. on the ros' arccs Of Tanmany
heeler with a party at his back which was as nm
scrupu,ous in accomplishing Its ends as these law
breakers themselves
Presto. within q week aftr the decision OF the
court Of last resort had been filed bill had been
rushed through both branches d the legislature aud
signed by the Governor amending IN Code OF Civil
Procedure that thesedefendani' could do the specific
thing which the Court Il Appeals had OILY few DAYS