Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1903-04-08
THE LAW AND THE COUNCIL.


mont continues, and Is likely to be-
come more and more complicated until
tie main question involved is settled 10y
tho courts. Strong opinions are en-
ttrtained ana expressed on either s'de
end a great deal Of unnecessary iu-teri
ing is exhibited There should DE-
However. no attempt TO increase 'h'
trouble by direct MISREPRESENTATION
personal attacks, and perversions o.
the actions and motives Of either party
to the dispute.
Our morning contemporaries arc
greatly exercised over the vote OF tn
majority Of the council on Monday
evening. against a resolution INTRO
euced By Councilman Thomas Thes
arc. or affect to be, highly indignant al
The failure Of the resolution, ana de'
nounce the action Of the majority u
vigorous language. one calls It with
cat treason in sense. law or decency'
"a dishonest position utterly lndefensl
bic in law and subyerslve OF the most
ordinary principles Of administrative
and public morality" The other de-
rounces It as "pgheaded stubborn
ncss" and declares that mo principle
whatever was involved In 1t. Nov
let them be reasonable and fair If pos
sible. and look at the matter with an
understanding Of the case. Here 1t 49,
IN brief;
When the payroll Of the police depart
ment was presented to the council II
was signed by George A. Sheets as
chief OF Police. The majority Of the
council declined to recognize the gem
tleman as the head OF the department
holding that he had not been confirmed
by majority of the city Council as
required by law and the rules OF that
body. But an order was issued requir-
ing the Captain of Police, as the act
ing head Of the department to ceftlly
TO the payroll, when Il would be duly
accepted, approved and paid The or
der was not acted upon, But a resolu-
ton was introduced in the council last
Monday authorizing the City Auditor
to "waive the o. X, on the police de-
partment payrols for March and after
satisfying himself from other sources
as to what each man is entitled to, to
draw his warrant to each man in the
department below the rank of Chief Of
Police, for the money to which he Is en-
titled for the month Of March, 1908"
The proposition was opposed ON the
ground that "the law requires the pay
rolls to be approved by the head Of the
department and the City Auditor has
an opinion from the city Attorney to
that effect" But this does not seem
to be noticed by the supporters of the
resolution The members of the coun-
ell who voted TO follow the law as to
the payment Of the police. are bitterly
assailed Tor doing so, and the
spectacle OF hardworking policemen
with starving families because of the
amazing stubbornness Of those hard
hearted and "pigheaded' oouncllmen,
is held up for public reprobation Now
Jet us look at the law that governs in
this contention. The following ordi-
nance was passed by the city Council
June 20, 1898. and duly signed by the
Mayor June 90 1903:
'Be It ordained BY the city Council
Of salt Lake city That the chief or
head OF each department shah here
after verify, under OATH all paWol's
and statements involving 'ho payment
of money as TO the correctness off such
payr9ls or statements, and that no
payroll or statement shall be accepted,
acted upon or approved until verified as
above provided"
Now, in the face Of that ordinance.
how could the council consistently
adopt the Thomas resolution And why
should the members who were governed
by its provisions be assaisd and abused
for their lawful action? ln view of the
language used by one Of the supporters
OF the illegal resolution, was it srprs.
Ing that the query Was raised whether
the proposition was designed Ito catch
suckersY II It had been adopted, ia the
face OF the ordinance wp have cited. Ct
would have been void and worthless.
The auditor would not have been SAT,
IN issuing his warrant nor the treasurer
in paying out the money
OF course. it is lamentab'a that the
policemen. who have fairly earned their
wages. Shot, be Rent ont OF their iuz.
dues for awhile But the hardship win
he only temporary 80 one wants to de-
Drive the men OF their salaries. Any
statement OF the Kind made ir the
council that such q wrong 's cmtem-
plated is not only false but absurd.
and raises the question whether the
whole scheme Of the resolution was not
designed as "a grand stand play" and
to put its opponents in o wrong light
before The public.
Il is conceded by our con, mro-aries
that the question OF the legality OF The
Chiefs confirmation has mo vital ar
ing on this particular cases" ANA that
It is without regard TO Che merits Of
this contention" Then what is TO reg
ulate In is disposition unless Dc be th
atty ordinance, framed especially foi
the purpose. and ihai has hen go force
for about ten years WIN the Tribune
eth assert. IN view az that fact that
"There Is no rseson ~ sense iaw oi