Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1903-04-30
Supreme Court
Gusts Sheets
highest judicial Tribunal Of HE Slate Holds That The Big
Teechoe Was MOI Legally Placed al The Head of he
Police Department and is Ibrgose S\Joi lis CHIEF
Vndicahon for The CITY Council

The Supreme court this afternoon de-
livered an opinion holding that Detec-
tive George A. Sheets was not legally
appointed chief of police, that he hence.
forth refrain from dischargIng any Of
the duties Of said office and that he be
ousted theretrom. 1t is held that he did
not receive q majority of the votes Of
the city council, which was necessary
for his legal election The decision was
written by chief Justice Baskin and
concurred In by Justice Bartch, while
Justice McCorty concurred In that por-
ton Of the opinion which holds that II
requires a majority Of all the members
elected TO the city council to confirm an
appointee Of the mayor, but dIssents
from that part which holds that such
confirmation creates liability against
the city
Mr. Sheets was not In his Office this
afternoon when a News man called
for Information. Inquiry developed the
fact that IL was not known whether he
had vacated or not. The belief was that
he had not but that he would do so late
In the day and turn the department
over 10 Capt. Burbidge from whom he
received it when he was appointed
few weeks ago. II Is probable that
Mayor Thompson viii send the name OF
another appontee TO the city council.
which meets tomorrow night
THE OPINION.
Baskin, c. j. This Is an original ac-
ton OF quo warranto instituted in this
court by the attorney general, on behalf
OF the state, 10 test the right Of the de-
PENDANT, George A. Sheets, 10 the Office
OF chief OF police Of Salt Lake city,
which he claims under an alleged APP
polntment by the mayor and city coun-
ell, and IN pursuance Of which he en-
tered upon and II dischnrgng The duties
VI said office, A general demuaer "a
interposed 10 the complaint The valid
ity of the appointment Of the defendant
Is the only question involved.
The olice Of chief Of police was Gre
ated by city ordinance
Sec. ia, Rev Stat, 1895 Is. as follows:
THE mayor by and with the advice
ana consent Of the council may appoint
all such officers and agents as may be
provided for by law or ordinance, and,
IN like manner MI all vacancies among
the same except as otherwise provided
by law"
II Is admitted that at the time Of the
alleged appointment of Sheets there
was a vacancy In said office and that
the mayor had the authority. BY and |
with the advice and consent OF the city
to MI the same by appointment. !
The appointment Of sheets was sent by |
the mayor 70 the city council for APP |
prevail The council consists Of 10 mem !
bers and at a regular meeting Of the |
same at which only 10 members were /
present, a motion TO consent TO and con.
firm the appointment was made and
vote thereon was taken IN which seven
Of the Is members present voted for and
six against the motion.
On the part Of the state Il is contend
ID ina the consent OF a majority Of all
The members Of the council was neces.
'ary under the section Of the statute be-
ore quoted; while on behalf OF the de-
endant II Is claimed that the consent
u the majority OF the quorum present
vas only required The number OF
ouncilmen whose consent is necessary
% confirm an appointment by the may
n is not In terms expressed in said see
ion OF the statute The intention of
aid section, in that respect, IS ascer-
alnable by the inspection OF other pro-
'isions OF tho statutes which shed light
lpon the subject
Sec. 200 Of the Rev. Stat provides that
The majority Of the council elected
hall constitute a quorum TO do BUSH
ess.' This general provision. II II
iere not limited by subsequent pro-
lsions, would sustain the contention OF
he defendant. but there are others by
'hich It If limited Under the pro.
isions Of Sec. 202, Rev. Stat. the con-
urrence OF a majority Of the members
lected to the city council Is necessary
the passage Of all ordinances. and ain
Propositions 10 create any liability
gainst the city
The state claims that the conhrma-
ION OF an appointment creates a la
ility against the city, and requires the
occurrence ~ a majority OF the coun-
linen. on the other hand the defend
nj contends that no liability is Gre
ted thereby II follows. from the pro- |
isions OF sec, 202. that II any liability ,
! created against the city by the APP !
ointment. that a concurrence Of a ma. [
,rity Of the members composing the @
luncil is necessary The question hing !
I upon the meaning OF the word Tia I