The Portland daily press., 1893-02-21

of the police department enabled him to
compel the support of some of those vot-
ers who were inclined to assist his rivals
for the nomination. Did he use this
power? His rivals for the Democratic
nomination alleged that he did, and the
green tickets which appeared in all the
ward rooms on the night of the caucuses,
bearing the name of the city marshal fur
nished strong corrobarative evidence of
the truth of their assertion. The news
papers at the time called public atten-
ton to the green ticket and alleged with
out contradiction that it was for the pur-
pose of intimidating certain elements in
the community. Yet the Mayor did
nothing to stop the growing scandal.
He saw it publicly proclaimed day
after day, without contradiction that the
city marshal had been using the
power of his Office to compel
men to support his candidacy,
but he did nothing and said nothing.
His watchful eye could detect flaw in a
water contract, but it could not detect
conduct on the part of his police de-
partment which constituted a public
scandal.
The scandal progressed. Formany days
in succession the city marshal was away
from his Office, failing utterly to perform
the duties for which he was drawing a
salary from the city, with no better ex-
cuse than that his absence was necessary
to promote the election of a sheriff in the
interest of violators of law, yet the
Mayors watchful eye detected nothing
wrong in this. The Mayor read in his
organ. the Argus, every day for weeks
at this period that the city was infested
with pocket peddlers, and that there was
perfect saturnalia of drunkenness, yet
not an arrest was made of the men re-
| sponsible for it.
| Having put itself under obligation to
violators of the law the police depart
ment has never been able to throw off the
paralysis which resulted from it.
Though the number of arrests has been
as large as last year only about a quarter
as many persons have been put before the
court. The remainder have been dis
charged by the police department. with
out any authority of law whatever. Ex-
cept in cases of the most heinous crimes
the sympathy of the department has
been with the arrested parties and they
have been repeatedly discharged without
appeal to the courts, even when their Of
fences were of a serious character.
Yet the Mayors watchful eye
has discovered none of these things, or
| if it has discovered them they have been
passed by in silence.
A good illustration of the way in which
criminals are dealt with by the police de-
partment is given on our local page.
| There was man who had been guilty Of
| brutal assault, a crime that might
| amount to a felony, for the statute says
that for assault and battery, of which
this man was clearly guilty, five years
punishment in the state prison may be
| imposed. Yet no complaint was made
against him. Clearly guilty of crime
punishable by imprisonment in the state
prison, with evidence easily obtainable,
he was discharged without being taken
into the court. To discharge this man
under such circumstances comes very
close to compromising felony. If
police officers are to prosecute men only
when complainant other than the officer
making the arrest voluntarily appears a
large majority Of offences against the state
will 60 unpublished. Every brothel, every
gambling house, every liquor nuisance
will escape. So will the participants in
the great majority of street fights and
riots. Yet we understand that the excuse
the police give for not prosecuting this
| O'Donnell, who had been guilty of a
crime that might send him to the state
prison and certainly would have sent
him to Jail is that the man whom he as
saulted did not voluntarily appear
against him. If that is to be accepted as
a sufficient excuse the police department
| might as well be abolished.
No wonder Mr.. Ingraham had nothing
| to say about his police department.. 8
0u, Comr,on ScbooJs