The Daily Ardmoreite. [volume] (Ardmore, Okla.) 1893-current, 1910-04-28
SAYRE'S ATTORNEY
PLEADS HIS CASE
IconIinucd from page oocl

Confined from page onc)
arguments the attorney stated that
thc board ru trying the case was a
fudiciar, body. 10 was q court Of JUS
ucc. fne man who presided over
Che courr had preferred the charges.
bc was tho prosecuting witness and
,Vns one ~ tho members who sat
in Judgment that the beard of com
suis- ioncrs had known an ahou'
,hr present trouble and that each
of mcm except th, new member.
John $ owen. was prriudi,cd 'n
his opinions and that the boar!
of commissioners uld not Dee q
court of Justice under those circum
stances. 1Hp lawyer made "a sirOls
talk ON the question of the proucnrss
uf The human mind to be- iu error,
that AN mnukiu. has moro or less
prejudice in his mind. aud hc said
It was impossible for his client To
obtain verdict that was not hiwscd
one way or the other. lie read at
length from the statutes and from
opinions of courts. lie conducted tn"
trial as though it had been in the
district court or somo other court
OF the state Tie said the charter
provided no means of dismissing en-
ploycs and that the statutes had to
bc depended upon for remedy and
che statutes had provided that IN
such cases the charges must 80 b..
fore "A grant jury and then be tried
IN the courts lie argued that whoa
au appointment Is made that the ap-
pointive power is exhausted; the en-
giueer Is as much an officer of the
city as the mayor. ne Is not n
hired man. but an official of the
city and liz not subject to DISMISSAL
10y the board nor Is hc subject 10
recall by the people. The lawyer
then wanted 10 know who sat on
the board who could pass on his
demurrer and give him a bill of
exceptions SO he could appeal to the
district court lie insisted that the
case must 30 before a grand jury
court Mr. Walker pleaded eloquent
iy and directed much of his talk
90 the audience who had assembled
90 hear the ease
The argument of Mr.. Walker wac
answered by city Attorney Moore
MIR Moore said the power to ap
point carric,a with II the power t'
dismiss. The creator can destroy
what he creates. The principle tina
hppointive prwcr and removal pCwc
gocs hand in hand Is well laid dowl
in the statutes and IL upheld II
court opinions Tie said the statute
provided that city councils could re
move any officer except the mayo
and said the constitution Ncstc
judicial authority upon boards an
commissions created by law. lie sal
m the case at hand the hoard ha
exclusive jurisdiction and its a,
tion was final, that no appca
could be taken To any court. "
said no contract existed between In
government anti an employc, that a
officer did not have "a property righ
IN an cfIicc, such rs would pr,
vent the executive from rcmoyin
dim. He said II the commissioner
could not dismiss men whom the
employ that commission gOvcrumor
VAS a monumental failure and sal
hy the attorney filing his dcmurc
ne admitted the charges rs true.
Following the argument Of the y
torncys. Mr. Dawson addressed IA
hOari iIe said they had assemble
there 20 discuss the matter hcfor
them pro and con lie said Mr. Sayr
had come with q demurrer allcgiu
that thc board was without authori'
to act. and said the accounts su'
mltcd hy the engineer had bee
passcd upon aud approved by o.
Electric Body Batterie