Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1903-04-30

, blIity." as used In said section Of the
| statute.
The second definition OF the word La
I bllty in Blacks law dictionary, ~ Eek
| posed or subject to given contin-
! eency risk, or casualty, which is more
on less probable"
IN Rapaljes law dictionary IL is said
that liability Is THE condition Of be-
/ Ing actually or potentially subject u
an obligation; Is used either generally,
as including every kind Of obligation,
or In a more special sense, to denote
inchoate, future, unascertained or i'm
perfect obligations, as opposed to
debts. the essence Of which Is that they
are ascertained and certain"
/ Anderson's law dictionary defines a
contingent liability, to be "A liability
which is not absolute. but depends up
on an uncertain event, as the liability
OF an endorser"
The liability of an endorser or a sure
" II contingent and not actual. until
default iby the payee or principal.
IN The case OF Cochran a Sayer V L..
", l5} L. S., 2S6, FOG, the court said
we know OF no definition Of the word
liability either given in the dictionar-
les or as used In the common speech Of
men, which restricts II to such as are
absolute, or excludes the idea OF con-
llngency. I'm fact, It is more frequently
used in the latter sense than in the for
mer as when we speak of the liability
of an insurer or common carrier. or
the liability to accidents or to error:
und IN Wcbsters dictionary the word
liable Is said 10 refer to a possible or
IN uahf
tually occur as horses are liable TO slip
even The sagaclous are liable 10 make
mistakes
IN Home Insurance company vs. p. &
= y. j 90, us H.. Ga. 20. IL is said that
he word tlinble) as used IN the policy
dos not signify a perfected or nNed
lt4al liability, but rather a condition
gl OF which a legal liability may arise.
I'VE word, as most frequently used
~ OF necessarily exclude the idea OF
a contingency"
in view Of the foregoing definitions.
II Is clear that the confirmation by tho
city council OF an appointment by tho
mayor when the Office has been preyl
ously created aud the salary has been
previously hXed, creates q contingent
liapilityi dependent only upon the IN.
lure acceptance, qualification aud dis
charge of the duties Of the office. by
the arpointee, events which, upon an
appointment were liable to occur as
was evidently anticipated by the city
council when the appointment was
made. This being so. It required the
consent Of a majority of the council
TO confirm the appointment Of the de-
PENDANT This conclusion Is strength
ened by the provisions OF section 2l5
Revised Statutes in which It is pro-
vided that an appointiye officer may
be removed by the mayor with the con-
curronce Of a majority Of the members
Of the city council or by the city coun-
~ with the concurrence Of the mayor.
IL Is well settled that 1.-THE power "a
remove Is incident to the power to APP
point In the absence OF some provision
Of law fixing the duration Of the Office.
ana the mode OF removal" % Am |
aud Eng Fncy Law. i35, and the |
numerous cases here cited In n. 10.
The duration Of the term Of chief OF |
police is not fixed by law.
In view Of the foregoing principles |
lt Is reasonable conclusion that the
v ord council was used I'm section 214 In |
he same sense as In section 2l5. and |
mat II was Intended that the concur
encq Of the same number of the coun-
'ilmen necessary IN a removal by the
mayor Is also necessary 10 both a re-
n0val by the council and an appoint
nent by the mayor. for unless that
orce Is given TO the word council the
anomaly IS presented OF the legislature |
eqnirng a concurrence of a majority
@ removal by the mayor. and a con-
urnnce Of a majority, only, Of a
Quorum Of the council when the re-
noval Is made by H.
We are clearly Of the opinion that
he defendant has not been legally ap-
ointed
II r. therefore ordered that the said |
ieOrgc 4. Sheets be, and he Is hereby.
nsted from the office OF chief Of police !
{ salt Lake city. and that he hence
orth refrain from performing any Of
he duties thereof, and that he pay
he costs In this behalf expended taxed
{ --- dollars. ! concur:
BARTCH j.
MCARTY's CoNCURRENCE.
McCarty. J.-Quallned Concurrence.
concur In that portion Of the opinion
herein II is held that II requires
lajority OF all the members elected 10
10 city council TO confirm an appointec
the mayor. but dissent from that