Albuquerque evening citizen. [volume] (Albuquerque, N.M.) 1905-1907, 1905-08-16
REPORT OF POLICE COMMITTEE

The report of the police committee last night, which
appears in the news department of The Citizen. this
evening, differed but little from what it was expected
to be.
The Citizen thinks of the recommendation to ap-
point a night sergeant. that the suggestion OF Marshal
McMillin is vastly the better. That there should be en-
ployed a man to stay all night at the city hail to receive
bonds. when such bonds will average about two a month,
is certainly a recommendation of doubtful value. Nor is
such an one needed to receive telephone calls and send
out the police. The Citizen does not believe that any
one has found any difficulty, day or night, in receiving
speedy answer to telephone calls. 1t might be well, per
haps, to publish in the papers the beats Of the different
members of the force, then all would know where to
reach them by phone.
The Citizen also endorses heartily the marshars
suggestion that one of the night force shall be a mounted
police, to wheel through the residence parts of the city
several times during the night, for as matters are now,
those parts are but little guarded.
The other recommendations of the committee as to
removing doors, screens and curtains from wine rooms,
and the requirement that the patrons of rooming houses
shall register, and that those who Register under as
sumed names shall be fined-these also The Citizen en-
dorses, provided the last two items are legal
The compliments and endorsements of the marshal
and his force, meets with the hearty assent of The Citi-
zen, though the occasion by no means demanded them,
since no attack has been made on the capacity, industry
or integrity of the force. Still, it is often we'll to say,
"Weil done, thou good and faithful servant" even
though no one had said that the said servant had not
done well or was not good and faithful. Praise is appre-
ciated by us all, and it encourages the employe or SER
want to continue in well doing and faithfuness.
But is it not a fact that the committee in its report
overlooked entirely the points at issue, and failed even
to refer to them. The chief points are: Has a police
man the legal right to arrest d man or a woman on his
suspicion that they are immoral? Must he not have a
warrant for their arrest, sworn to by some one that they
have committed some violation of law, or must he not
see them himself in the very act of such violation?
When a woman is arrested upon mere suspicion and COM
PEELED to put up cash bond, which means a fine, for she
will not appear at court the next day and the bond will
be declared forfeited-when such bond is required, has
not the arrest been illegal, whether the man making the
arrest receives the cash bond or fine, or whether he
must take the arrested party to another policeman to
pay the fine or deposit the cash bond, whichever you
may choose to call it? The question is not, who shall
be made the custodian of the cash collected? But was
not the arrest illegal? Was there any right to impose
a bond for appearance, upon one for whom no warrant
had been issued and who had not been seen by the ar
resting officer committing any violation of the law?
This question the committee carefully avoided.
The other point is that no policeman has the right
TO enter a mans room or to enter a rooming house, on
suspicion that there may be some one there whom he
may arrest and place under cash bond, or fine, for un
der the circumstances they are virtually the same, un
less the said policeman has a legal warrant or has been
requested to investigate the place by the proprietor OF
the premises. Yet the committee avoided this point
also. In other words, they Investigated the police
against whom no charges were made; but did not in
vestigate the system, which compells the police to be
themselves the violators of the law. u