Pine Bluff Daily Graphic

The discharge of Chief Culpepper and the appointment of Alex. Petersen to succeed him was again the chief topic of conversation in Pine Bluff Saturday, and so far as the Graphic heard the matter discussed the mayor's acting was condemned. He is not condemned for suspending Chief Culpepper, but for appointing in his place a man against whom the mayor himself makes charges which should have prevented his appointment.

The police committee of the council attempted to hold a meeting in the city attorney's office Saturday afternoon, and would have succeeded but Mayor White "butted in," as Alderman Nichols put it, and explained that they had no authority to hold a meeting. The gentlemen composing the committee are Aldermen Meyer, Nichols and Weil. Mr. Nichols said: "If a meeting is to be held, we will have to go somewhere else to hold it," and the committee departed to meet elsewhere, but what they did in the matter is unknown.

There seems to be a difference of opinion among the lawyers as to the meaning of the following paragraph of the suspension of the chief of police or chief of the fire department: "The mayor shall have the right to suspend for inefficiency, misconduct, or neglect of duty, the chief of the police department and chief of the fire department until the next regular or adjourned or special meeting of the city council; at which meeting he shall lay the matter before the city council; and unless his action be approved and the chief be removed from office at such meeting within five days thereafter, by a vote of a majority of the council elect, the suspension shall cease; provided, no officer shall be twice suspended for the same cause."

The point at issue is the "five days" feature. City Attorney Coleman holds that "the five days thereafter" is meant to convey the fact that a regular, adjourned or special meeting of the council shall be held within five days after the suspension of the chief of police, and that it is the mayor's duty to see to it that a meeting be held, even if it be necessary to call a special meeting in order for him to lay the matter before the council. Other attorneys hold that the five days' limit is put on the action of the council after the meeting has been held, and that the council's power to act after five days is void. The law is an ambiguous one. There is no breaking the sentence until after the words "five days have been passed," making the words "five days" modify the word meeting, if the word "held" be inserted after the word "meeting" and before the word "within," as Mr. Coleman has explained and holds to be the true meaning of the law.

Mayor White has filed the court stenographer's records of the Culpepper trial and his suspension order with the city clerk for the benefit of the council's perusal Monday night. In his order of suspension Mayor White claims that he has a witness whereby he can prove that Culpepper on one occasion slapped and knocked down a female, whose name is unknown. That is a thin story, and should not have much weight with the council.

Mr. W. B. Sorrells was heard to say that the reason the civil action was brought against Culpepper was to oust Culpepper from a job, stating that "Cull" had made him (Sorrells) walk two blocks once to make a bond for a "nigger."

City Attorney Coleman holds that should the council meet and take no action on the report that Culpepper would become the lawful chief again by virtue of the last two lines of the section quoted in the foregoing. It is evident from that section that after the mayor has made his first appointment his power to again appoint a chief of police must be confirmed by the council. The whole story will be told in a real interesting manner at the council meeting Monday evening.