The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-08-30
.washlngton time q D. m. St. Paup.
THE POLICE HaMIc1nE-

Within day or two past a MINNEAPOLIS
policeman shot and killed citizen who
being suspected of having stolen prop
erty in his possession, and being afraid
evidently of arrest by policeman. ran
away 1t is only a few months ago since
& corresponding case happened in the
same city, the policeman being removed
If We remember rightly, as the result of
his misconduct. Within few weeks
another policeman, of this city. having a
suspicion that a certain citizen had Jew
elry in his possession that he had not
come by honestly, shot and wounded
the flying suspect in the spine. fnntcting
on him serious injury.
1t viii be observed that in no one Of
these three cases of murderous assault
by police officers was the victim of police
firearms under arrest, or known to be a
crimirsel and in none of them was the
policeman armed with a warrant.
We believe there is a rule of law that
no police officer has the right to arrest q
citizen without a warrant unless he has
personal knowledge of the commission of
crime by the person arrested. Now. if
citizen does not choose to stand quietly
by and submit to arrest, or grows ner-
Vous and runs away from the prospect
OF being charged with a crime either
assuming that he be innocent or guilty.
does that give right to a policeman TO
assault that man with a deadly weapon
and so far as one may judge by results.
with intent to kill that man?
This is a very serious question. Dress
any vulgar, brutally disposed fellow in 3
little brief authority, and he Is liable at
any moment to run to violent excesses
in the exercise of his authority. The
Clio e does not believe that there was
the slightest warrant whatever for the
bloody assault made in any one of these
cases. In each case the assault was
made too, by an official created to pro-
tect the lives and property of citizens
and to preserve the peace. Assuming
that the man who has just been killed
by policeman's bullet in MINNEAPOLIS
did as matter Of fact come dishonesty
by the copper wire or whatever he had
in his possession, and was about TO dis
pose of it. knowing it to have been dis
honestly obtained, it was none the less
an atrocious crime on the part of that
policeman to kill him, and he ought 70
be prosecuted and jailed for his murder
GUS assault.
The recent case in St Paul is the same
In principle. The officer who shot citi-
zen said to have been trying to disnosa
of jewelry not his own ought now to be
behind prison bars. Not one of such mon
is fitted to hold policeman's baton for a
moment Not one of them should be al
lowed to remain in public employment
of any kind. The right of every citizen
to policepan's protection, until he IS
formally charged with crime or until he
is known to have been engaged in the
commission Of crime, ought not to be
questioned for a moment. Would It not
have been Infinitely more to the advance
ment of justice that all three Of these
men. assuming them to be guilty of the
ofIenses of which they were suspected.
should have escaped arrest or should
have subjected the police authorities to
little extra trouble to discover their
whereabouts in the future, than that
they should have been shot down as they
were, like dogs, on the public thorough
fare?
Americans have very decided respect
for all the agencies and representatives
of the law; and will in the majority of
cases be disposed TO pass over such oc-
currences by regarding them as deplor-
able mistakes. Such view of any seri-
Gus invasion of the personal rights Of the