The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1908-05-29

comfortable for him to be tried b,
those who have prejudged him guilty
The supreme court would overturn il
quicker than wink if the, council
was to remove him. 1t was wrong
and illegal proceeding. Mr.. Geddes
likened the proceeding to person
tried before a civil judge who had him
self made the charges. There was a
right way to impeach Mr.. Hodapp, but
this had not been followed. The coun.
ell could start again and thus avoid
doing anything that would reflect on
itself or the administration.
City Attorney Schmitt said that ii
did not seem that the defense was
starting out in good faith in the way
that it had done. 1t had cited no
authorities. The courts of this state
had held that the council is the prop
er tribunal to prefer and try charges
He quoted the city charter, and said
that if the city bookkeeper had re-
fused to do his duty, how could the
city business be done unless the coun-
ell preferred charges against him ?
Must the transaction of city business
stop because the city bookkeeper re-
fuses to perform his duty? Mr..
Schmitt cited New York case where
two aldermen had reported upon
charges that it had investigated and
the council had removed an official
and the supreme court had upheld it,
and said it was the duty of the coun-
ell. He also cited a Michigan case,
where the governor had preferred
charges against the secretary of state
and tried and ousted him form office
and the supreme court had upheld
him, saying that it was regular and
proper. The passing of the resolution
by the council means only that charges
have been made, and if found true the
council would vote for the recorders
removal from office, and the members
would be doing their duty as aldermen,
and they were the only tribunal that
could try the respondent for miscon-
duct in office, and it was their duty to
do so.
Mr.. Geddes said that counsel had
talked around this motion. The New
York case was not a parallel one,
as only two of the aldermen had
made the charges.
The council voted unanimously
against sustaining the motion, and eX-
ceptions were taken, by the respond
ent.
Recorder Files His Answer.
Mr.. Geddes filed the recorders an
swer to the charges, on general APP
pearance City Attorney Schmitt read
the charges adopted by the. council two
weeks ago and the resolution providing
for the trial. These have heretofore
been published.
Mr. Geddes read the recorders an
swer, which will be found. elsewhere.
Evidence Introduced.
Mr.. Schmitt was then sworn, and
Mr.. Geddes objected to any evidence
being taken, on all the grounds pre-
viousIy raised, and the council over
ruled This. Mr.. Schmitt testified that
he was the petitioner in the action,
and is and had been for more than
twelve years resident and elector of
Mankato.
Mayor Andrews was sworn and iden-
titled certain council records bearing
on the case, and the pay roll and order
for it, after numerous objections by
the respondent, all of which were
overruled by the council,
as the latter acted in every case
against the respondent, no matter how
his objections seemed, Mr..
Geddes was impelled to address a few
words of reproof, saying that some of
the rulings were ridiculous. The al
dermen were there to find the facts,
and not to let the witnesses state
facts and conclusions. No court in
would uphold this.
Proceedings Went Slowly.
The audience became slightly dem
onstrative, and Aid. Atchison asked
everybody to refrain from this. Aid.
Atchison wanted the proceedings to 60
on faster, Mr.. Schmitt called Mr.. Ged
des' tactics pedipogging, but Mr.. Geddes
said that he had assumed that it was
a court of justice and the case was
being tried as nearly by the rules
of courts of justice as possible. He
was trying to get the record made up
right, so that the case could be taken
to the supreme court. if necessary.
Mayor Andrews related his CONVEX
sations with Mr.. Hodapp regarding the
of the order for the payroll
Daby's name. The council
and resolutions were intro
duced. The statements of the recorder
at the special meeting on May 9, and
the supplemental proceedings based up
on them, were presented.
Adjourned Until Thursday.
At 1l:l5 p. m. the question of adj
iournment arose, and Mr. Geddes said
that he had intended to object to the,
holding of night sessions, as it was
difficult to get witnesses then. He
had agreed to hold this night session
to oct the case Opened provided it