Richmond times-dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1914-current, 1918-08-04

occasion for a grand jury investiSa-
ton would not have arisen had the
Police Department been innnarcd and
controlled in accordance with the pro.
visions Of the Charter; but. ! can
readily see that under the policy fo,-
lowed hy the Mayor. decentralization OF
the Police Department is inevitable
particularly IT, as stated by the grand
jury u, it's report:
The record OF =. y, sherry as eau
tain OF that Uhc FirsD district and
his associations did not Justify Nor
warrant his promotion to the office OF
chief" followed. III another part of
the report. with the recommendation If
the removal OF {. y. Sherry from tn.
Police Department for the good oc the
service.
The recent grand jury indicted a
number OF police officers When tr.
cases came to trial they were tried
under tho strict rules of criminal cvi-
dcnce. and acquitted. |; Is but natural
for ihouEhtleSs persons I" presume
therefore. that the proceedings of the
grand jury were useless and OF no Of
feet so far as those cases are con-
c"rncd. But not so, for shall il be said
that the true test OF the fitness of a
man Ia DC police officer is whether
he should or should not be convicted
Of actual crime?
Would not that I've very dangerous
standard OF fitness?
The truth is that il is not the func-
ton OF the criminal courts to deter
minc who is a proper person TO he a
police officer. but the Mayor should
determine Il.
The very officers themselves. II in
nocen; OF wrongdoinE, are entitled TO
more than the verdict OF jury ac-
TITLED 10 the Endorsement OF the cNecti-
tive. who is charged with supervision
Of their conduct.
ACQIII"rAL NOT PROOF
OF FITNESS FOR OFFICE
On the other hand. acquittaI in
criminal court OF a crime is no proof
that the person acquitted is proper
person 10 b" Il police officer. In using
this Illustration. OF course. ! am not
passing Judgment or criticism upon
the particular officers who have lust
been tried: that would he neither prop
O. NOR necessary. hut the general min
ci0lr involved may thus. / think. hc
clearly demonstrated.
II IS well known that the state laws
of Virginia must We enforced in the
cities II we are to have due regard for
public peace, health and morals |, is
also well known that we have album
dan; and comprehensive laws. but they
count for naueht unless those charged
with thcir enforcement are keenly
alive to their duty.
would like TO ask whether in tho
recent past there have been any rules.
regulations or orders adopted cs-
iahiished, PROMULGATED or enforced hy
inc Mayor having reference to the
following state laws:
ta> Section &7rn OF tho Code Of Vir-
siniA cas- amended on the subject Of
persons lahoriug a. their trade or call
ny on sunday. commonly called the
sunday observance LAW"
OBJ Section 500 OF the Code of Wiz
sinia Ohc old law on tho subject of
PERSONS not ~ good fame> as amnii-
ned enlarged ami explained Ivy the
rules and regulations OF tho Virginia
stat" Hoard Of Health for tho control
OF v"ncrea! diseases, which became cf-
t'cilNc rs part Of the state law on
June l. 1915.
'c) Section 37so of the Code of vir.
Gina. ON the subject Of houses of III
fame and other sections in the Sane
chapter on the subject OF immoral con