Omaha daily bee., 1902-04-16
ARGUE POLICE BOARD CASE
Attorneys for Present Board Assert Court
Has Already Settled the Question.
BIG SAVING IN STATE INSTITUTIONS
Present Administration Expends $780,
600 Less Per Year Than Fusion
lists in spite OF High Prices
A.. for Provisions.
BIG SAVING IN STATE INSTITUTIONS
From Q staf NORTHUMBERLAND

y ONH Correspondents
LINCOLN, April 15.-(spacial.)-The aues-
tion Of whether or not the governor has
authority to appoint a Board Of Fire and
Police Commissioner for the city Of Omaha
was again argued and submitted to the SUI
preme court this afternoon. The contest
ing attorneys consumed nearly the entire
time Of the afternoon session in their pres
entation OF the case. G. c.. Wright, the re-
lator In the application for a writ Of man
damus against the governor. appeared In
his own behalf and was assisted in the ar
gument by Frank t. Ransom and william
F. Gurley. The governor was represented
by Norris Brown, while on the same side
Of the controversy appeared Ed Smith as
attorney for = a member Of the present
board.
In legal terms the issue argued this aft
ernoon was one Of res adjudicata, II being
asserted by the attorneys for the governor
that IL the right Of the chief executive to
make the appointments was adiudicated in
the Moores case, It must necessarily fol-
low that the right Of the respondent to
make appointments was likewise adiudl-
Gated.
lis this court going to play fast and loose
with this respondent" the attorney for a
member Of the present board asked. us II
going to say to Governor POINTER, you can
not appoint members Of the Fire and Police
Commission for the city Of Omaha and deny
TO his appointees the right to the ofhceSin
question, and then Issue a writ
Ing Governor Savage, the respondent, to
make such appointments? VIII this court
issue its writ today. commanding this re-
spondent to make appointments and tomor-
row, when the order has been obeyed, deny
to the appointees the right to the Offices
in question? II the judgment in the case
OF Moores was binding on the state and gov
,ernor In the subsequent action Of the state
ex rel against Kennedy, would II not be
clearly binding upon any appointments this
respondent might maker"
Leads tn Absurdity.
Continuing, the argument was advanced
that IL would be the contamination of ABB
eurdity to deny the right Of the governors
appointees to the ONCE in question. as was
denied to them in the Kennedy case. and
now. on the application OF the reIator. com
pei the respondent to again do the act
which In the Moores case the court deter
mined was of no validity and conferred no
rights to the persons to whom the commits
sions we're issued.
But 1t is argued that this court in a
recent opinion In the Redell case has re-
fused to follow the rule Of law laid down I'm
the Moores case added the attorneys.
such Is no doubt true. but that Is not
equivalent to reversing, v~acating or mod
flying the judgment in the Moores case.
Is 1t possible that by reversing a rule OF
law or refusing to follow a rule OF law an
nounced In some prior decision that there
by rights which were settled In that litIRa-
tion become unsettled? Volume TX OF the
Nebraska reports contains six pages show
ing q table Of overruled cases. Does the
overruling Of those cases have any effect
whatever upon the rights OF persons set
tied by those cases which were subsequently,
overruled? There can be but one answer
TO such a proposition. The fact that the
constitutionality Of a statute was in oues-
ton does not alter the rule. The fact that
the Judgment In the cases OF the State ex
rel against Moores and State ex rel against
Kennedy were entered In quo warranto pro-
ceedings and the further fact that this IA
an application for a mandamus does not
alter the rule"
In closing 1t was said: THE court has
twice solemnly declared that the governor
OF hts state has no right under the act
OF 1897 to appoint members of the Fire and
Pollce Commission for the city Of Omaha
10 now issue the writ against this re-
spondent to compel him TO make such an
polntments is to treat the former decisions
OF this court as being without coherency
or consistency and will convert this forum
into a theater Of political strife"
Saving In State Installations.
An examination OF the records IN .hs
auditors once shows that the state in
situations have been maintained under the
republican administration at a cost OF 500
IfS.OS less than the amount appropriated
by the legislature for the FIRST year Of the
blennium.
II the second year presents the same re-
suits the saving In the two years will
amount to more than $3.50, 900. In other
words. at the close Of the two years term
there will be a surplus in the funds OF
nearly 100000. this estimate being based
on the cost for the first year,
There is every reason for the belief. how
ever. that the sum will be even larger
'haa that. When the republican admins
tration took charge nearly all of the state
institutions were in a deplorable condition
New beds and bedding. furnishings and
like material had to be purchased and
considerable money had to be expended for
immediate repairs. All this expense. as
well as bills amounting to several thou
sand dollars that were contracted by the
fusionists' are included in the nrst year.
and yet there Is a surplus Of more than
$4,000 In the FIRST years quota of the ap-
preparations. The only expense required
during the second year will be for food
clothing and salaries. so the cost the sec
ond year will likely be much less than the
nrst.
Governor Savage and the Board of Pub
lie Lands and Buildings are gratined over
the showing made, for II is much better
than was ever made by the fusionists and
that. too, in the face OF the fact that meat
butter, eggs. potatoes and all provisions
were much higher the last year than dur
Ing the fusion administration IL not than
ever before In the history Of the state.
When the fusionists went out Of power
the appropriations were all exhausted and
they left to their successor approximately
$4,000 in unpaid bills. for the payment OF
which the legislature had to make de-
aeieney appropriations,
Appropriations and Expenditures.
The following table shows the total
amount appropriated. the amount expended
during the FIRST year. and the surplus re-
naming Of the first years quota:
-