The morning call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1878-1895, 1895-01-19
THREE MEN In A BOAT.
AlYOrd Did Acknowledge the
Governor.
WATERMAN WAS RECOGNIZED.
Commissioners TObiR and Hammond
Did Likewise.
FACTS DISCLOSED BY THE RECORD.
The Question Is Whether the Commits.
SiOnerS Resigned Their Original
appointment.
WATERMAN WAS RECOGNIZED.
FACTS DISCLOSED BY THE RECORD.

Police Commissioner Alvord stated the
other day, when he was interviewed in re-
gard to the reappointment of himself and
Commissioners Hammond and Tobin in
1890 by Governor Waterman, that the COM
missions may have been issued, but he and
his associates took no trouble to find out
about them. He said he did not ask for
them and did not want them; that they
were merely surplusage. He said he did
not pay any attention to the matter, as he
held his appointment from the old District
Court
AS a matter of fact Police Commissioner
Alvord and his two confreres, Tobin and
Hammond, did pay much attention to
the matter. The cause Of their appoint
ment was the expectation that the Legis-
lature was going to take action in the
matter. That Alvord, Tobin and Ham
mond not only took great interest in the
matter, but went to the length of recognize
ing the Governors power to appoint, and
actually accepted his appointments will be
seen from the following records on file in
the County Clerks office:
I do swear that Twill support the constitu-
ton of the United States and the constitution
OF the State OF California, and that will faith
fully discharge the duties OF the Office OF Police
Commissioner in and for the city and county
of San Francisco according to the best of my
ability. So help me God WILLIAM ALvoRD.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th
July, 1891.
do swear that viii support the constitu-
ton of the United States OF America, and the
constitution of the State of California, and that
I will faithfully discharge the duties of the
office of Police Commissioner in and for the
city and county of San Francisco according to
the best OF my ability. So help me God.
r. P. HAMMOND.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 18th
day OF July, 1891.
[seall H. L. JoAcHMsEN,
Judge Police Court city and county of San
Francisco.
1 do solemnly swear that will support the
constitution of the United States of America
and the constitution OF the State of California,
and that viii faithfully discharge the duties
of the office of Police Commissioner in and for
the city and county of San Francisco accord
ing to the best OF my ability So help me God.
ROBERT J. ToBIN.
Subscribed and sworn before me on this 18th
[Seal.l J. w. KEYEs, Notary Public.
These documents are sufficient attestation
of the fact that Alvord Tobin and Ham
mond recognized Governor Waterman's
power to appoint Now their critics are
asking this question: If they did not recog-
nize his right ana authority as Governor of
the State to reappoint them, and had the
reliance which they now claim on their
original appointment by the old District
Court, why should they have gone to the
trouble to file notice of their appointment
with the County Clerk, and more than that
place on record their official oaths of Office,
solemnly accepting the appointment and
declaring their intention to serve as Police
Commissioners under Waterman's appoint
ment to the best of their ability?
Their official oaths so filed show that
they did regard Governor Waterman's
commissions as something more than
"mere surplusage," and that they were
exceedingly anxious that their appoint
ment by him should be fully protected by
the public records.
The question arises: Did Commissioners
Alvord, .Tobin and Hammond, by accept
ing Governor Waterman's appointment,
ipso facto, resign their original appoint
ment by the old District Court, and enter
on new term of Office under the new APP
pointment, thereby losing whatever rights
they may have had under the appoint
ment by the old District Court?
This question will be fully discussed
when that matter comes up before the Su-
preme Court in the case that Stewart Men
zies intends to institute if he is not recog-
nized as a member of the Board of Police
Commissioners. 1t will cut an important
figure in the case, according to theA views
stated by the leading attorneys who have
given opinions in regard to this matter.