The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1897-11-27
THE CURFEW WILL PASS
COUNCIL COMMITTEE RECOMMENDS
THE ORDINANCES PASSAGE.
1T Will Probably Meet Little Oppose
tiOn Some Provisions of
the New Law.

Councilmen Smith, Knight and Bowser
constituting the committee on public NOR
ais, last night decided to recommend the
passage of the curfew ordinance without
any amendments. The main objection
against is is that it provides for the in
generation of children in the event parents
or guardians refuse to pay fines. Mr.. Smith
said that he did not like this feature. Sim
liar objections have been urged by other
councilmen, but the impression prevails
that it will pass with little opposition.
Alexander Hogeland, who has been the
most persistent advocate of the ordinance
predicted that if it is passed in Indianapolis
within sixty days all the important cities
in the State will enact similar laws.
The ordinance prohibits ANY person I'M
der fifteen years of age to be or remain in
or upon any Of the streets, alleys or public
places of the city after 9 o'clock at night
from March to Aug. 81. and after clock
from Sept to the last day of February
unless accompanied by parent guardian
or other person having the care and GUS
tody Of such minor person." or unless in the
performance Of an errand, or whose en-
ployment makes it necessary. fine not
to exceed SIS for each offense may be in
f1icted and the minor "stand committed un-
til such fine and costs are paid" This last
sentence would require children to be sent
to the workhouse if fines were not paid, to
herd with hardened criminals. Mr.. Hoge-
land, however, insists that nothing of the
kind need be apprehended, and suggests
that the police judge might let the prisoners
go on suspended sentence conditioned on flu
ture good behavior.
Section prohibits parents or guardians
from permitting minors in their care from
violating the ordinance under pain of a
fine not less than 81 nor more than $40. The
remaining sections of the ordinance provide
for enforcing the law as follows:
Section 3. Each member of the police
force, while on duty is hereby authorized
to arrest without warrant any person will
fully violating the provisions of Section l
OF this ordinance, and detain such person
for reasonable time in which complaint
can be made and warrant issued and
served. Be it further ordained, That no
child or minor person arrested under the
provisions of this ordinance shall be placed
in confinement until they have first been
taken home to ascertain the parents wishes
and the parents shall have refused to be
held responsible for the observance of the
provisions OF this ordinance by said minor
person
Section 4. 1t shall be the duty of the
police judge, upon the arrest of any child
guardians have refused to become RESPONSE
BILE for said minor person for violation of
the provisions of Section ! of this ordi-
nance, to inquire into the facts of said ar
rest and the condition and circumstances of
such minor child or minor person, and if it
shall appear that such child or minor per-
son, for want of proper parental care, is
growing up in mendicancy or vagrancy, or
is incorrigible, cause the proper proceedings
to be had and taken as authorized and pro-
vided by law in such cases.
There is one glarng defect in the first
section which provides that minors shall
not be out after 8 o'clock at night from
March 1 to Aug. 81. inclusive, of each year,
and from Sept. l to the last day of Febru-
airy, inclusive, of each year., etc. The last
clause should read from Sept. l in any
year to the last day of February of the sue
ceeding year" words to that effect.
Quite fight was made in the Roby race
course cases over just such an ambiguous
proviso.
Messrs. Mahoney Harston and Grail, who
constitute the Council committee on rules,
met last night but did not complete their
work. There will be another meeting be,
fore the special meeting of the COUNCIL
Monday night But few changes in the
rules of the Council will be recommended.