Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1897-12-29
REVIEW OF the PRATT CASE.



Fire and Police Commissioners Noble
and Dininny sent communication to
the city Council last evening, reviewing
the Pratt case. II was the Intention
to have the document read but for
some reason not fully explained. this
was not done. The communication
is couched in the following language:
I'm view of the fact that the board
of fire and police commissioners 70 out
of Office In the near future, the under
signed, members thereof, being the on
ly members at this time in town, ex-
cept Mr.. s. j. Kenyon, deem 1t our duty
TO call your attention to the matter Of
the CHARGES filed with this board
against Chief Of Police Arthur Pratt,
and the action this board has taken
with reference thereto, and the status
of the case.
when the charges were filed the
board, consisting OF the present mem
bers, except that Mr.. Cohn was then
a member of the board, suspended Mr.
Pratt. pending the hearing. When
the charges were presented TO Mr.
Pratt he waived the ten days notice
of hearing and announced that he
waived his right to a hearing by a
coed to trial with the three members
then present, Mr.. Cohn being out OF
the state.
AT a time to which the matter was
continued. and after the dispositions OF
some witnesses favorable to Mr.. Pratt
had been taken at his request. Mr..
Pratt demanded trial by full board.
AS Mr.. Cohn was still absent, the
meeting was adjourned until August
20. 1891. Before August goth came
Mr. Cohn had resigned and Mi. Kenyon
had been elected to fill his place on
. frfgr m
10th, counsel for Mr.. Pratt and also
Mr.. Kenyon made numerous ob1ec-
tiona to the procedure of the board.
Mr.. Kenyon claimed that the board
was without Jurisdiction, for the rea-
son that at the time the charges were
filed by the board Mr.. Pratt had not
been reinstated, as ordered by the
Supreme court, and the suspension was
Illegal and great deal more OF the
same sort all having In view un avoid
ance of n hearing on the charges, ar
ter which one witness was examined.
ION that examination Mr.. Kenyon
took part in objecting to questions asked
and in interrogating the witness. After
the examination of this witness an ad-
1ournment was taken. At subsequent
meeting of the board for the purpose
of proceeding with the case, Mr.: Ken
yon made the same objections that he
had made before. His objections not
p
of the board, but being made. not as
a commissioner, but as counsel for Mr..
Pratt the board overruled them. where
upon Mr.. Kenyon left the room, refus-
ing TO sit in the case. which refusal
he has persisted In to this time. After
MIR. Kenyon had left. MIR. Pratt was
asked II he was willing to proceed with
the hearing before the police commits
sioners present. which he declined to
do. Later Mr.. Pratt brought suit to
compel the board TO relnstate him. up
on the grounds Mr.. Kenyon had raised
as reason why the board had no right
to try Mr.. Pratt. The court, by Judge
Hiles, denied the relief prayed for, and
dismissed the case. The further hear
ing OF the case was set for December
9th at 1880 p. M. notice of which was
given to Mr.. Kenyon and Mr.. Pratt.
Mr. Kenyon did not attend, but Mr..
Pratt did. A full beard not being pres
ent. another day had been set TO hear
this case, namely, December goth. Mt
II n. M. at which time. If Mr.. Kenyon
does not attend, the trial cannot pro-
coed.
ut seems to us that this hearing
should be concluded. IL for no other
reason than that the question of the
salary of Mr.. Pratt while under sus-
pension may be settled and not be
left to litigation hereafter. for II he is
not dismissed on the hearing he may
be entitled to his salary while under
suspension, and if he Is dismissed he
would not be so entitled.
"There has been some newspaper
talk that the hearing was ended by
Mr.. Burton sending the board let
ter Withdrawing the charge which. of
course. Is. not true. Mr.. Burton filed
the charges. The board proceeded to
investigate them, and has not COM
pleted that investigation. The charges
could not be withdrawn without the
consent of the board. which has not
been given. Mr.. Kenyon presented the
communication. which was fled like
every other communication, and no ac-
ton was taken upon 1t. There can be
no doubt but what these charges are
now pending before this board. and
that by reason of them Mr.. Pratt Is
under suspension. This Is doubtless the
view taken by Mr. Pratt and his ad-
visers. for they have never claimed
the office since the dismissal of their
suit before mentioned.
I'VE feel that you should know these
facts that you could act in the matter
intelligently If you care to act at all.
and that you may know that n ma
Jority of this board have attempted to
perform the duties devolvlnE upon
them and that their every effort TO dis
pose of this matter has been frustrated
by the conduct and action OF Mr.. Ken
yon, and that II Mr., Kenyon will not sit
on the hearing. SO long as he Is COM
missioner, the board cannot proceed
with this case"