South Bend news-times. (South Bend, Ind.) 1913-1938, 1914-10-14

POLITICS OR No POLITICS, WHAT
THE BOARD OF SAFETY DID To
HARRY JENNINGS AND AN
DREW GALIUP-IS \ CAUTION.
What the board of safety did 10
Patrolmen Andrew Gallup and Harry
innings is a caution-Or at least
ought 20 be. An opportunity to re-
sign instead of being found guilty
and fired was afforded the former,
while a fine of a months pay, and a
reprimand, probably calculated to
present a resignation alternative. is
the penalty imposed upon the latter.
Gallup resigned. Jennings, despite
the probable hardship that must ac-
cure from a poorly paid patrolman
having TO work month without COM
pensation, apparently intends to stick
and take his medicine.
The charges against Jennings were
that Of entering a saloon in uniform
for other than official purposes, and
drinking while on duty.
Gallup was accused OF insubOrdina-
ton and of being found in Magyar
hall on the lap OF a woman. II was
also at first reported that he had
been drinking and that his insubordi-
nation had been influenced by wom-
en-. but this failed TO materialize
either in the charges or in the testi-
mony-proves to have been just a hit
OF unwarranted gossip.
Jennings explained that when he
~7-5v- L
he was on his way home for dinner
and considered himself off duty; but
the board took a different view.
GaHup's explanation was that he
dropped into the hall where a dance
was on and that a woman grabbed
him and pulled him into her lap from
which he forced his release soon as
possible. but Of this too. the board
seemingly thought differently.
Gallup did not deny his insubordina-
ton but charged it TO unreasonable
restrictions In this too ne lost out
How strong the evidence was
against the men il is not for Us TO de-
termine The board is supposed to
exercise its Judgment, and he that
mains that the police force needs 10
take notice that-especially those
who were not overly anxious about
having the present administration
made possible-would do well TO toe
the scratch and not take many
chances.
Neither is there much excuse for
being peeved about il. IL is merely
a part OF the game of politics. and
they all play it-a game too. some
times capable OF being played 20 good
public advantage.
1t all depends upon the angle from
which YOU look at il. Those i'm SYM
pathy with the present administra-
ton will deny that it is politics. Those
against it Will declare 20 the con-
trary. just as when i'm former days
the basis OF criticism and defense
were the reverse.
To please its constituency il is m
cumbent upon the present admins
tration 10 take an occasional crack
at the attaches that il inherited.
That is one way or proving 10 that
constituency that the administrators
are fast on the job and doing tbings.
They have laid down their rules. Po-
ncemen should know them and obey
them. and 20 be on the safe side
which is the safest side TO be on
the thing 20 do is not 20 expect the
benefit OF any doubts.
We repeat criticism here. how
ever the same as we exercised i'm the
ease OF the dismissal OF Fred G.. Mad
lex The board is not justified in
giving n man a hearing on one charge
and finding him guilty on others. He
should have hearing on all OF them
or they ought not be considered. It
IS a poor excuse for the board to say.
"there are a number OF other things
that we know. that might have been
brought up" IF there are. they
should be brought up. and i'm the
strenuosity OF the proceedings. II they
ere not charged. one has at least "a
logical right 10 guess that they do
rot exist
As il stands on the face OF it. Pa
trolman Jennings has been dealt with
pretty severely for a hrst ofense.
since the public knows Of no others.