The morning times., 1896-05-05

From the effort to get through Congress
the bill prepared by Major S. II Walker,ex-
police superintendent, and indorsed by the
East Washington Citizens Association, TO
provide for minor police tribunals, there has
arisen a decided difference for adjustment
between the police department on the one
side and the police court and Attorney
Thomas on the other.
This fact was noted1n The Times about
week ago. when Major Moore filed with
the Commissioners his answer TO the judges
and yesterday another chapter was added
by the District counsellor.
In an opinion rendered yesterday TO the
Commissioners Mr.. Thomas presents a mum
Der of objections to the proposed amend
ment of the bill, House NO. 6997 Ito pro-
vide for the appointment or live police
magistrates. )" asnotcd in the Evening Times,
ard says the measure should not receive the
| approval of the Commissioners, since, ire
spective of the legal objections to 1T. 1t
would not remedy the supposed defects in
| the present system.
Its enactment, lie says, would entail an
| additional expense of $50 900 annually
upon the taxpayers. If any considerable
portion of this sum were appropriated to
| increase the police force, this would ma
| terially relieve the principal objection of
| the police department To the present police
court system, and also afford the COM
| munity better protection.
MAJOR M0ORE'S ASSUMPTION.
The ajorandsuperintendent Mr.. Thomas
states, assumes that an amendment pro-
! posed to section will obviate the consti-
| tutional objection pointed out
That section. rs amended, would make the
magistrates a part of the police court and
| give them concurrent jurisdiction with that
1 n 4
| ordinances and regulations of the District
| but no jurisdiction i'll United States cases.
| Being part of the police court, tender
of trial by jury in the police court proper
| is a tender of trial by jury before the
| ma giStrates.
Mr.. Thomas does not concur in this vie .
| The amendment, he says, simply changes
| the original section SO as to attempt to-
| make the police MA gistrateS' courts auxiliary
| TO the police court for one purpose, but
| not for others, and is intended to zap
! parently" remove the constitutional oh.
| lection without doing so in fact.
| 1t is immaterial, he says, i'll view of the
| decision OF the Supreme Court of the
United States in Callan VS.. Wilson, whether
a defendant entitled to u trial by jury
valves that right or not.
In order that the court assuming to Try
| him may take cognzance of the case fol
the purpose OF trial by jury, or by the
court on waiver of jury trial, it is es
sential that a jury shall actually exist
| under the control and as a component par
| of the court itself
| In other words, a court without Il Jur,
| as part Of itself is not constitutional
| court for the purpose of trying any cast
coming within the constitutional right o
trial by jury. There viii be no concurren
Jurisdiction, Mr.. Thomas says. even if The
section be amended as proposed.
POLICE JUDGES ANSWERED..
The superintendent answers the objeC
tions to the bill filed by the judges of th
police court by citing that the bill pro
yides for speedy hearings, so that accuses
persons may not be held in duress owe