The Scranton tribune. [volume] (Scranton, Pa.) 1891-1910, 1896-04-06
WILL KILL MILLS BILL
NayOr COnnell to Veto 1t Just Be-
fore Retiring.
REASONS FOR THIS ACTION
lie Shows That to sign 1t Would Not
Ouly he PcrniciOus but Illegal.
New Point in Municipal
Law Interpreted.

Mayor Connell will today veto the
bill of eX-Police officer Thomas Mills,
who claims $3.50 salary for the time
which elapsed between his removal,
Nov. p, 1895. and March 10. 1896, when
the removal was confirmed by select
council
Both councils favored the payment
Of the bill and eleven days ago it was
sent to the mayor for his consideration.
As he has fifteen days grace before
the measure can become operative
without his signature he can withhold
his approval or disapproval until the
last minute before high noon today and
as councils expire at 10 o'clock or
thereabOuts they cannot pass the bill
over his head.
In an opinion on this matter deliv-
cred to Captain Moir, of the judiciary
committee of common council City So
licitOr Torrey held that Mills was an
officer and entitled to pay until the time
select council confirmed his removal.
The mayor attempts to show by pointed
argument and copiOus extracts from
the city charter that the solicitor does
not fully enter into the merits Of the
case. The resolution and the cOmmu-
nicatiOn containing the veto are as fol-
lows:
Whereas. Police Officer Thomas Mills
q, 1885, and that during that time the
investigation has been pending he has
been ready and willing to perform his
duties as a patrolman as soon as notified
Of his reinstatement; and
Whereas, The mayor has now made his
removal absolute, and that he Is not to
be reinstated; therefore be 1t
Resolved. BY the common council, the
select council concurring, that the fiscal
officers OF the city are hereby authorized
directed
said Thomas Z. Mills In the sum of two
hundred and fifty dollars, being payment
in full for the time suspended to March
l, 1896
MAYORS COMMUNICATION.
I'm refusing to approve the accom-
panying resolution, providing for the
payment of the salary of eX-Police Of
ficer Thomas Mills, from the time of
his removal Nov. q, 1885,, until such
removal was confirmed by select coun-
cil.March 10, 1896, l do 1t with no de-
sire to withhold from ex-Police officer
Mills any salary which he may be en-
titled to. but rather because l believe
that this ex-police officer is not en-
titled to any compensation from this
city for services not rendered.
ION Nov. 81, 1895, I directed Chief Of
Police Simpson to call in the city prop
and remove him from the department
Of Police, under one of the most Sc
rious charges that police officer Of the
city Of Scranton has ever been charged
with. This removal so far as the ap-
pointing power was concerned was COM
plete, the confirmation of the act rest
ing with select council.
THE provisions of the Act Of 1889
are particular in providing when the
time shall expire for the mayors ap-
proval or disapproval Of the legislative
acts Of the councils. and the various
court of law places upon his the re-
sponsibility that the disapproval of any
legislative acts of councils shall be reg
ularly placed before the branch of
council where 1t originated within fif-
teen days from the time Of presenta-
ton to the mayor.
Nowhere, however, do we find in the
charter the necessity of the mayor to
Immediately submit his action as to re-
moval to the select council, but on the
contrary, he shall submit his actions
to councils from time to time as he may
deem expedient.
Section 2, Article vii, of the Act of
1889, the mayor shall supervise the con-
duct of all city officers and examine
the ground Of all reasonable complaints
against them he shall COM
municate to councils at their first stat
ed meeting in. January of each year.
and from time to time as he may deem
1t expedient a statement Of the condi-
'tions and affairs of the city in respect
to its government together
with suggestions and recommendations
of all such measures as he may deem
conducive to the interests and welfare
thereof policemen shall obey
the orders of the mayor, and make
report to him, which report shall be
laid before councils whenever required;
the mayor shall exercise a constant sup
ervision and control over their conduct
and hear and determine all complaints
against them
AS TO MAYORS ACTION.
The one is the action of the mayor
upon laws regularly passed and must
of necessity be limited as to the time
when the legislative act should have
his approval or disapproval so that it
might not be possible for important
legislation to be impeded or prevented
by the position taken by one in the per-
son of the chief executive. The other
Is the approval or disapproval of the
acts OF the mayor vested in him by the
act of 1889 by the confirming power.
This leads me to say that upon sub
mitting to councils his (the mayor) ac-
tion. the proposition before them is of
necessity, does the action of the mayOr
meet with the approval of the confirm
ing power?
IF however, after the action of the
mayor in the removal of officer Mills