The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1911-05-25

The city council held a very lengthy
and interesting meeting last night, at
which several important matters OF
interest to the public were disposed
of, the two most important being the
passage of the ordinance relating TO
the police department and the adop-
tion Of a resolution introduced by Al
derman Renshaw providing for an
election to decide whether or not a
tax shall be levied for the maintenance
Of a public library. Both Of the meas
ures were discussed at length and the
session consumed three hours A large
number of citizens were present and a
number Of them engaged in the dis
cussion of the police ordinance.
THE POLICE ORDINANCE.
The ordinance adopted at last nights
meeting gives the chief OF police the
power to appoint men from the de-
partment to the positions of deputy
marshal, captains, desk sergeants and
turkeys The ordinance, which had
been previously read before the coun-
Gil twice, was last night put back on
second reading and amended slight
ly before it's passage. The amendment
did not change the intent or force of
the ordinance, but simply made IL
technically satisfactory. A clause was
inserted making the assignments Of
men to duty subject to the rules and
regulations adopted by the board Of
public safety.
AS stated, the ordinance called forth
lengthy discussion, and at times the
discussion was heated. The discus
sion began when Alderman Kugleman
in reporting as chairman of the or
dtnance engrossing committee on the
ordinance, read a communication from
the three new members nominated in
the recent primary for membership on
the board of public safety, in which
they stated that the ordinance met
with their hearty approval and urged
! its passage. Alderman Concaunon OBJ
jected to receiving the communica-
| ton, saying that the signers were
not members of the board and had no
right to address such a communila-,
ton, in the shape it was signed, TOT
! the council. (The communication was
| signed Members Elect Board of Pub
| lie Safety.). Alderman RenRhaw
spoke in support of the objection or
Alderman COncannon, stating that the
communication did not represent the
board of safety and that it was a
veiled influence, a veiIed force. He
said the proposed ordinance was
usurping the power given by law to
the board. He stated that the efficient
| police force Of the city was due to
the board of safety and the chief, and
that while the chief was due great
credit, this ordinance would establish
a dangerous precedent
SUPPORTED ORDINANCE.
Alderman Meyer replied to Alder
man Renshaw, saying that in his opin-
ion the proposed ordinance would not
give the chief of police any more DOW
er than any corporation would give to
the man at the head of it and that II
the chief put the wrong kind Of men
in these positions, the board still had
the right to discharge them from the
| service. He made the point that the
chief of police is under bond, while the
men in the oflce under him, and who
are handling money and other Valua>-
bic articles are not, and that. in his
| opinion, the chief should have the
right to choose these men. In regard
to usurping the power of the board Of
safety, he said the council had the
right to pass laws governing that
| board.
An expression from the board of
public safety being called for, Mr.. z.
! W. Elliott was granted the privilege
OF the floor. Mr.. Elliott stated that
he was opposed to the ordinance and
that he believed it was unjust to the
old and to the new board of public
safety. He said there was no cause
| for such an ordnance and challenged
the chief of police, or anyone else, to
show where anything was wrong with
the rules Of the board OF public safety.
At this point Alderman Concannon
asked Mr.. Elliott a question as to
whether or not officers against whom
charges had been preferred had gone
| (Cn-+ir.,.a - D. rr---..