The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1904-06-03
BRAY CASE IS DECIDED
MICRO WHO PASSED AS A WHITE
MAN.
The supreme Court Sustained Recorder
Arlington In Sentencing Him to
SIX Months mt Hard Labor ON
the Streets.

| 8
Two municipal bugbears which have
been used to frighten the municipal
government of Montgomery. were ban
fsfed yesterday by the Supreme Cour'
| OF Alabama
First. the City Recorder of Montgom-
cry has a clear title to his office and
ms may fine a prisoner or sentence
MIN to hard labor. Second, the City
Recorder may fine a prisoner or sent
ence him to hard labor for his refusal
to pay a cab bill. Such a sentence the
court declared yesterday. in passing
| upon the case of Jim Bray, negro
was not Imprisonment for debt, but IL
was inflicted for the purpose of main
tanning good order as provided by
a city ordinance which the City Coun-
ell had a right to pass.
The appeal of the Bray case was not
the first time the office of City Re-
corder has been under fire. A defect
had been discovered in one of the laws
relating to the once of City Recorder.
Attorneys have taken advantage of this
defect to make legal attacks upon the
City Recorders Office. These attacks
have heretofore failed of results. The
Court again held in its opinion yes
terday that although one act relating
to the Office was defective. IL did not
follow that the office was invalid and
that the officer was incapacitated from
OAStC isiuB CERTAIN JUDICIAL
inasmuch as the ONCE had been clear
" and constitutionally created under
acts of the Legislature previously pass
ed and had been confirmed by succeed
ing acts.
The other point raised in the Bray
case was more uncertain. Was the
fining or sentencing to hard labor of a
prisoner for refusing to pay a hack
bill Imprisonment for debt? In the
opinion of a number of lawyers 1t was.
Ii the opinion of other lawyers 1t shaw
ed Imprisonment for debt very closely.
Imprisonment for debt is forbidden by
both the Constitution of the United
States and the Constitution Of Ala
bama.
Some of the city officials have feared
that the enforcement of the hack ordi-
nance was imprisonment for debt and
have frankly said that they would pre-
fer that no test case be made OF the
ordinance. which had been productive
of much good. The fears of these off,
ciais were groundless. however.
In reference to this point In his brief
before the Supreme Court. City Attor-
ney Ray Rushton said: las to wheth-
er or not a violation of the ordinance
was a crime seems to be immateriaI
We do not insist that 1t is a crime
within tie guarantees of the Constitu-
tion as to jury trial. Indictment, etc,
oil Montgomery was given authority to
impose the fine that was imposed. The
act. of the Legislature giving author
ity to punish in this way have been
passed upon by this court and 1t has
always been recognized that either
flne, imprisonment or hard labor might
be imposed, but on account of certain
readings of some of the acts both could
no. be imposed"
1t was further contended that the or
dinance in question was passed by the
Council to preserve peace and good or
der and to prevent swindles. These
contentious of the City Attorney were
sustained by the opinion. long and
The case of Jim Bray is itself one
of special interest. Bray was a Pull
man car porter. being almost white In
color. He looks very much like a
white man.
Three months ago Bray, after being
paid off, stopped over in Montgomery
TO- night out. He first went to a
white restaurant, where he was served
with supper. He then engaged a hack
and was driven about the city. He
visited several resorts where only
white people were accustomed to visit
At the end OF his night off, however,
he refused to pay the hackman who
had driven him around. This was
There was no law which could reach
him for passing himself of as a white
man, but there was a law which could
punish him for refusing to pay hack
hire. Recorder Arlington, on this
charge. gave him the limit of the law.
six months at hard labor. He is still
at work upon the streets OF Montgom-
cry.
Bray's attorneys appealed to Judge
A d. Sayre of the City Court, for a
writ of mandamus. alleging that he
was illegally detained by the Chief of
Police of Montgomery. To sustain this
claim 1t was commended that the Office
of City Recorder was invalid and that
Trays conviction was Imprisonment for
debt.
Judge Sayre refused the mandamus
and committed Bray to the care of the
Chief of Police. The Supreme Court
yesterday affirmed that ruling.