Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1903-07-09
INJUNCTION is DENIED
Chancellor Watson Refuses to Re-
strain Mayor Burke.
Court Of Equity Intcrfcrcs with Acts
Of Public Omcials Only in
Absence Of n Remedy Mt
Law.

Tho opinion of Chancellor j. II. Watson
in the petition for temporary injunction
to restrain Mayor Burke from interfering
with Chief of Police Brownel in the exer-
else of the duties of his office was re-
ceived Thursday afternoon at the office
of o. 7. Ray, county clerk, and the in
junction is denied, Although the in
junction is denied. Chief Brownell has
secured all that he wished for and all
that he could have secured had the in
junction been granted. His desire was
to have the charges against him filed
with the board of police commissioners
and since the petition for an injunction
was made the charges have been filed.
Judge Watson's opinion was in part as
follows:
The hearing before the chancellor was
upon the question of granting a tempo
rary injunction as prayed for. During the
hearing the defendant was permitted to
file his affidavit in opposition to the mo-
| ton. His affidavit 50 filed sets forth in
| substance that prior to his said notitca-
| ton of suspension to the orator he had
| received charges against him set forth
| therein; that he then believed and now
believes the charges to be we'll founded
| and that the same ought to be properly
Investigated: that he has done the best he
could to prepare for the investigation
and secure the necessary evidence; that
| he has already put into the hands of the
|
| formulation of the charges which he ex-
| poets and believes will be duly presented
| to the board of police examiners for their
| immediate action thereon; that he has
been delayed therein by what he believes
to be the necessary investigation of the
question whether one of the police cx-
aminers was legally appointed, which
question arose subsequent to the su>>
| pension of the orator; that he has acted
in the utmost good faith in the premises.
The defendant contends that the said
rules made for the government of the
| police force have no binding force on the
mayor, and that his actions regarding
such matters are discretionary under the
provisions of section 2l3-215 of the charter
and hence board (courO will not inter-
forc herewith.
1t is difficult to see how such rules
made Us provided for by section 212 are
Of less binding force upon the mayor
than upon the chief of police. Thorc is
no good reason why the mayors actions
regarding matters loEitimatoly within
i the rules should not be governed thereby,
and we believe such is the law
But the reason for Interference by n
court Of equity with acts of public Off
Gals is the absence of any adequate
! remedy at law and where such adequate
remedy exists at law an injunction will
not issue. y court of equity will not per-
NIT itself to be made the forum for de-
torminng the disputed questions of title
to public Offices. but will in the absence
of statutory remedy leave the claimant
to his common law remedy by proceed
n2s in the nature of quo warranto
Neither will it interfere in the case of
unlawful removal of a public officer
where the title to the office is not in dis
putc; for he may by mandamus be re-
stored to his office.
1t is contended by the orator that the
rule that courts of equity frequently rec