Evening star., 1901-06-20
VEXED QUESTION SETTLED.

Judges Decision In Controversy he
tween Mayor and Police Board.
Special Dispatch to The Evening Star.
ALEXANDRIA, Va, June 20.-Judge
Charles E. Nicol of the circuit court. in
vocation, at Manassas this morning rem
dered a decision in the case of Mayor
George L. Simpson of this city against the
board of police commissioners, also OF this
city, heretofore outlined in The Star.
Judge Nicol entered a decree to the Ell
feet that rule No. &C. as amended, pre-
scribed by the board of police commission
ers of Alexandria city for the regulation
of the police force of that city, lis not in
conflict with the constitution laws of
this state, and that it is not unreasonable,
and therefore not null and void, and the
Injunction heretofore awarded restraining
and enjoining the enforcement be and the
same is hereby dissolved.
This section applies to the changing OF
the policemen, at regular intervals, who
were assigned for the duty at the station
house. Recently the rule was amended py
the board so as to direct the chief OF po-
lice or other officers acting in his stead
to change the detail of officers at the sta
ton house every two months In ms
lengthy opinion, handed down, Judge Nlcoi
said:
The board is given the absolute and TN
restrained power to select the policemen
for Alexandria. This necessarily involves
the right ana power TO pass Oh lIe luoliiA-
cations and fitness of those whom they Sc
lect as policemen. The power to appoint,
the power to remove and the power to reg
ulate necessarily implies the power to es-
tablish rules for the government and dis
ciplne of the police force. l am unable to
say that the adoption of rule 56, as amend
ed. is an unreasonable exercise of d1scre-
tion on the part of the board of police COM
mssioners = AS the board has the
power of appointment and removal it must
be assumed to know the qualifications of it's
appontees, and that they are qualified to
discharge the duties to which they are as
signed"
Judge Nicol ordered in regard to rule 80
that that rule prescribed by the board is
not justified by law, and the board has no
authority to establish it, and that 1t Is an
hereby declared to be null and void, and
the injunction heretofore awarded restrain
ing and enjoning the enforcement be and
the same is hereby perpetuated'
This rule directed the mayor to give his
orders to the police department, through
the chief of police, or officer acting In his
stead 1t provided that any policeman con-
victed of receiving orders from the mayor,
except in the manner prescribed, should pe
dismissed from the force
In this connection the court held as fol-
lows: The mayor is clothed with authoi-
ity to enforce peace and good order IN MS
city, and he Is responsible to the common
wealth. whose officer he is, well as to
the community which elects him. for the
manner in which he executes his trust
and hence of necessity he must be untram-
meIed in giving his orders to the police
force and in receiving information from
any member of il or from any other source
touching the welfare and the peace and
good order of his municipality"
A decision in the case has been awaited
with much interest, not only in this city,
but in other places in Virginia where there
has been friction between mayors and po-
lice commissioners. The case has been be-
fore Judge Nicol for some time. 1t was ar
gued by Attorney John M. Johnson for the
mayor and Attorneys Francis l.. Smith and
Samuel G. Brent for the board of commits
SionerS.