The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1901-06-19

from captain brewer pIeClICl, III
only ones brought in. Sergeant Hayes
who thinks he will have Captain Brew
er's place. I will not speak of the poo
taste of this man. Afer the captain
head was in the basket and his owl
elevated he tells these matters. Con
nelly, five years on the force, brough
in as expert on discipline. Brewer
couldn't remember. Why, Connolly
couldn't remember that two months
ago he was reprimanded for not re-
porting a policeman. Why, If he lives
to be half as old as Captain Brewer
and the disease is progressive he won't
have any mind at all. Brewer, thirty
five years in service and never at any
time was he transferred for cause. In
February, 1900 Coroner Mix said that
the reason for the transfer was fric--
ton between the city attorneys office
and the police officer.
J Brewer inefficient? Wrinn testified
/ that he broke up houses of ill-fame in
the central station. Their claim about
policy playing is broken up by Mr..
Webb testifying that $50 warrants were
I served, Inefficient at the time of the
/ local campaign when Clarke came down
and said you are raising the old boy
| pulling the administration saloons and
letting the MCCAIN saloons alone. The
mayor is mad at you Brewer goes up
to the mayors house and discusses the
matter and it is not denied. Mr.. Dris-
| coll did not deny it although expected
it,"
These men were living too long. They
did not have the decency to die. 1t
would not look well to hit them on the
head with a club, but you commission
ers could cut their heads and you fell
lows with records will take their places.
The men will have respect for me If
have got record. do not believe Mr..
Avery ever intended to remove Brew
er. The exigencies of the occasion
brought that about"
Mr.. Arvine at the beginning of his
address criticised Mr.. Wolfe for his
statement that the police officers had
no hearing. He said the commission
crs had absolute power of removal.
In reference to the charter he said he
knew nothing like it in the United
States, II is another indication Of that
new fad of absoIutism which, has
sprung up in this country. In his lit
tie way the mayor has more power
than the president But in matters of re-
moval he must grant q hearing as
specified 1t was dangerous to give the
mayor power of impeachment of his ap-
pointees, but it was given him with one
check, the privilege Of appeal to this
court.
Mr.. Arvine argued on the deeper
points of law in this case, referring
particularly to the refusal of mayor
Studley to have counsel at his hearin.
He said the court had been given pow
er to sustain or revoke the action of the
mayor. The question was whether
there was full hearing before the
mayor, There was not, because the
men We're refused hearing by coun
sci, The case was regarded as similar
to quo warranto proceedings and in
such proceedings right to be heard
by counsel is given. Wherever the
question of civil right is on trial
man has right to be heard by coun-
sell
1T has been suggested that this is
baby act" said Mr.. Arvine. us it?
DO you believe that any layn.an could
have dragged out of Chief Wrinn the
testimony he gave? Some lawyers
couldn't have dragged it out of him.
Do you suppose one of those commits
s.oners could have brought out those
facts? They went away, and were JUS
titled in going away. The trial before
the mayor was a mockery of a trial"
He claimed that if a full hearing was
not given by Mayor Studley then the
court couldn't approve of the order of |
Mr.. Arvine held that Mayor Studley |
had no power to remove men for some
thing done under the administration Of |
his predecessor and which his predeces- |
sor had investigated and acted on.
Judge Robertson closed the argu-
ments for the city. He said that Mr.
Arvine had mistaken the law altogeth-
or. Under the old law the mayor had
no power; he was a mere figurehead
There had been change. The citizens
secured new charter vesting the chief
executive with greater
powers to stay the hands of political
iespoilers. Judge Robertson read sec
ion of the charter, under which the
were brought. Impeach-
nent is preferred by one house and
ried before the other These were not
proceedings.
The accused party on trial by i'm
)eachment is entitled to counsel. A
rimnal proceeding differs That de-
,rives a man of his liberty or his life.
t is under the charter of the city that
hese men were tried for malfeasance
n office. A full hearing does not mean
hen trial by jury, counsel and all the
echnical things of a court room. The
mayor has a discretionary power, and
n this instance he had acted within
lis discretion in removing the commits
toner's. In his investigation he had |
light to inquire fully into the actions
nd doinss of the commissioners and
n that inquiry he found things which i,
I'd him to believe that the commits
toner's were not acting properly, and
e had discretionary power to remove ;
hem.