Omaha daily bee., 1895-07-31

received your most remarkable letter In which
letter you speak Of dual government" and
with It's attending conflict Of authority and
unseemly strife and contention among these
whose duty II Is TO conserve peace"
Again you say: "The appointment at this
time Of a new board Of FIRE and police COM
mlssioners and the attempt. etc. would result
in inevitable Disturbances, provoke street
brawls"
Again you refer to "the large number ot
men in the city Of Omaha organizing and
holding frequent meetings with the avowed
expectation Of becoming a part Of the police
force under the provisions Of the law at an
early day"
In reply to this have the honor to say,
sir. that the people Of Omaha are a law
abiding people, and your aspersons against
the good people of that city are entirely
without foundation In fact, and can be but
the product Of an unusually excited mind
For the last two days | have cOmminged
with the people Of Omaha and talked with
a very large number upon the very subject
you alude TO- both before the reading OF your
communication In the press and after. and
did not discover any such facts 10 exist as
you assume. No person. directly or indi
rectly said or indicated anything from which
even the most timid and imaginative mind
could have inferred anything Of the kind you
refer to.
The people of Omaha expect to submit to
the law while at the same time they look
the enforcement Of the laws.
REFERS TO THE POLICE TROUBLE.
As proof Of the forbearance of the good
people of Omaha I desire to call your ex
cellencys attention to the provisions Of an
act passed in 1888. See chapter II, page 403,
Session Acts Of 1898. N the first section 1t
is made unlawful for any person or persons,
association, company or corporation to bring
or import into thls state any person or per
otr fpr tba Of igph hl 20 O.
the duties devolving upon police officers.
"Section 2. That no mayor, sheriff or
chief of police or board Of police commits
soners shall appoint any under sheriff or
deputy for the protection Of public or prl-
vate property, except the person so ap-
pointed shall be resident of the state"
But. notwithstanding, I credibly in
formed this old board to which you refer has
displaced many of the better police officers of
the city Of Omaha, and put in their stead men
imported into the state only a few days be-
fore. and yet there has been such occur
rences as you seem to think may occur.
l note what you say relative to quo
warranto" proceeding. Please, governor, in
form US how this can be done, until there
are at least two parties claiming the same
Office; until a new commission be appointed
who can contest the right of the old board.
note what you say about the constitu-
tionalty OF the act. ! read at the time. quite
carefully your veto message Of the bill, and
nave just re-reau II, ana am un4Dle 10 nnu
the slightest intimaton therein as to its un-
consttutionality.
IT, at the time, you thought 'it was un-
constitutional. please tell us why you did
not then point it out to the legislature. If
1t be for the reason that it takes from the
executive the appointing power, please refer
us to the section with which it is in con-
fct If 1t be in relation to some other sub
ject than that of the appointing power please
inform us in what respect 1t be deemed un-
constitutional.
Again, If deemed unconstitutional why did
you not suggest the ACCESSIBILITY of the
supreme court decision at an earlier date?
1t is more than ninety days since 1t re-
ceived the three-ffths vote of both houses
Why wait until after the final adjournment
Of the court? Was 1t in order to at this time
question its validity for an excuse for the
old board to refuse to submit to the express
will of the people through its Legislature?
l have always supposed it the duty of all
executive officers to enforce the laws as made
by the legislative branch of the government
and all such laws are presumed valid until
pronounced otherwise by the courts
You also say: Men in the city Of Omaha
are organizing and holding frequent meetings
with the avowed expectation of becoming a
part of the police force under the provisions
of the law"
unable to comprehend how this can
be possible, as nnder the law the COM
mission is clothed with the power of appoint
insane would hardly entertain the
''avowed expectation" of becoming a part of
the police force when even the appointing
power was not only not known, but in fact
did not even have an existence. / cannot be-
leve there are "a large number os men" so
visionary. 1t occurs to me that you have
been misled by some excited visionary mind
and have not consulted the sober, thinking
business men of Omaha.
HAS NOTHING TO AGREE ON
You say: cor that an agreed case shall
be submitted TO such court under the pro-
visions of section 567 of the Code of Civil
Procedure" That section provides:
"Parties to a question which might be the
subject of a civil action, may, without action,
agree upon case containing the facts upon
which the controversy depends, and present
a submission of the same to any court which
would have jurisdiction If action had been
brought. But 1t must appear by affidavit that
the controversy is real, and the proceedings
In good faith, and determine the rights of the
parties The court shall thereupon hear and
determine the and render judgment as
Ii an action were pending"
Please inform us what question exists
which might be the subject of a civil action.
am not aware of any such question. If you
can commence a civil action against the land
commissioner and the attorney general to
determine the constitutionaity of the act re-
ferred to, then perhaps an agreed case might
be maintained. But could the validity be
tested in such an action? Upon what theory
could it be contended there was a question
which would be the subject of a civil action
between yourself and the two other members
of the board? You may refuse to take part
but still there would be sufficient number
to constitute a quorum who could act. But
further, ut must appear by affdavt that
the controversy Is real and the proceedings
In good faith, and determine the rights Of the
parties"
May not ask. governor. what right be-
tween yourself and the other two members
of the board is involved in this controversy
II new fire and police commission was
appointed and they claimed the right to the
offices as such fire and police commissioners,
which right was denied by the present in
cumbents, and as a basis to such right they
c0ntended the act referred 10 be in conflict
with some constitutional provision, then
can see how these two boards might make
up an agreed which would settle the
rights of the parties, and in determining
this, would pass upon the validity of the act
you refer to,
am free to confess, l not only have no
objection to the supreme court passing upon
the validity OF this law, but of any law.
You can always depend on this department
10 do its utmost for the enforcement of all
laws. and for law and order in any part OF
the state. also feel that know the tenn
per and sentiment of the people OF Omaha
-. =