The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1898-04-03
STATUS OF THE POLICE.
Allison's Opinion In Line With The
Herald Forecast.


AS published in yesterdays Herald,
City Attorney e, NJ. Allison has pre-
pared an opinion for the mayor touch
ing the status of the various police OF
fcers of ogden and constituting the ef-
feet on the department of the supreme
court decision in the Pratt case.
Mr.. Allisons report was completed
and submitted TO the mayor yesterday.
II confirms in every particular the fore
cast made by The Herald. The opinion,
in substance. is here given:
During the year 1897, and for some
time prior thereto, the chief of police,
captain of police and subordinate Of
ficers of the police department of Ogden
City held office under the statutes
which were in force prior to the taking
effect Of the present revised statutes
on Jan 1. 1898. The particular statute
under which the police department was
organized was what was commonly
known as the non-partisan fire and po-
lice act of 1894 as amended in 1896. IN
der such act, and the act amendatory
thereof, the chief of police and other
police officers of Ogden City were APP
pointed to hold office during good be-
havior, unless il should be thereafter
otherwise provided by law. The law
under which the officers of the police
department were appointed has been
repealed. but the supreme court de-
cided in the above case that the repeal
of the law did not abolish the offices
included in the police department. and
that such department, as constituted
prior to Jan. !. 1896, is continued in
existence by virtue of certain provisions
of the revised statutes of 1898. The
decision is also To the effect that there
is no provision in the revised statutes
authorizing the municipal authorities
to create or provide for the organiZa-
ton of police department other than
such as was in existence before the
revised statutes took effect.
7 am. therefore. of the opinion. in
view of this decision, that the chief of
police, captain Of police and other po-
lice officers of Ogden City who held
office under the statutes in force i'm
mediately prior to Jan. 1, 1898, are still
entitled to hold their respective offices
under the same tenure as heretofore,
tO-wit: during good behavior. but sub
ject to be removed in the manner pro-
vided by law.
1T follows therefore. that such por-
tons of the ordinance recently passed
by the city council of this city, and
approved by the mayor. as provided for
the organization and support of po-
lice department in Ogden City other
than the department which was in eX-
istence prior to the passage thereof. are
in conflict with the law as declared by
NAAO sup NAtAC NoNAA = eRAid a NAACACAOiSS
OF no effect.
1T follows. also that the appointment
by the mayor and confirmation by the
council of a captain and other police
officers for Ogden City, under such or
dinance. are also Intellectual and void,
and that the members of the depart
ment who yielded up their offices to
those who were treated at the time as
their successors, are entitled to be re-
instated.
THE case of the city jailers bears a
different aspect. Under the revised
statutes the city council is given ex-
press power to esta blish, erect and
maintain city jails. and to appoint nee
essary jailers and keepers. I have,
therefore, reached the conclusion that
the present incumbents of the latter
offices. who were appointed and con-
fiFned under the recent ordinance of
the city, are entitled 10 perform the
duties of their respective offices and
receive the emoluments thereof.
THE question is one not entirely free
from doubt, but l deem the above to
be the conclusions warranted by the
recent decision of the supreme court
IN the district court yesterday, Judge
Rolapp made an order providing that
all motions, demurrers, etc, now pend
ing, shall be set for hearing April ). a
setting os cases was made as follows:
Wednesday, April 6-Charles Hecht ,
VS.. Joseph MetZler.
Friday, April 15-Ogden Savings Bank |
VS.. W. c. Warren ct al; Robert NJ. |
Rurch VS.. receivers Union Pacific Rail- /
way company.
Saturday, April 1.-THE State of
Utah vs.. Hol-en Olsen.
Monday, April 1S.-A. H Mess VS.. |
George A. Craig; James Aiken VS.. Peter /
Minnock ct al
Tuesday. April I9.-Thomas Cunning /
T
company.
Wednesday. April 2O.-Byron F. Pace
VS.. Oregon Short Line Railroad CON-
pany.
Thursday. April I'll. w. Tackett
vs.. Fred y. Hess ct al; Nellie Tackett 1
VS.. Ogden City.
Friday. April 22.-Alfred Crebbin VS..
John R. HorsDool: William Reese VS..
q. MaIan-
Saturday. April 2s.-Lewis Zitzman
VS.. John Pignon; ogden State Bank VS..
X. ]. Hill ct al
Monday April Flames p Snod-
grass VS.. Pioneer Electric Power COM
pany: Mary a. Garner VS.. Frederick
Garner ct al.
DAMAGE SUITS.
Mrs. Imgrid Olson has brought suit
against the Oregon Short Line in her
own behalf and as guardian for the
four children Of August Olson. The
suit is for $4,000 and grows out OF the
accident at HarTisville crossing Dec.
II last. when the Cache Valley express
ran into the freight outfit of Mr.. Olson.
killing him, destroying his wagon and
horses. Richards & Allison are the
attorneys.
George Stratton yesterday filed suit
against Ge0rEe Barr for $4,000 dam
ages.
The suit grows out Of the recent Hot
Foot" affair StrattOn alleges in the
complaint that he was seriously burn
ed about the foot and leg by alcohol
poured thereon at the instance and
under the direction of Barr. the affair
occurring in Bars saloon while STRAIT