
    People ex rel. Anderson v. Police Commissioners of Yonkers.
    
      (Supreme Court, General Term, Second Department,
    
    
      Filed July 23, 1886.)
    
    1. Police—What sufficient ground for discharge.
    The relator, a policeman, falsely stated that one of his associates on the police force was guilty of a grave, immoral act, and one injurious not only to him, but to another, as implicating an associate in guilt with him. Relator also tried to get the false statement published in a newspaper. Held, that such conduct is sufficient ground for removal, as being injurious to the public peace and welfare and unbecoming a public officer.
    3. Police commissioners—their powers as to expulsion.
    The police commissioners constituted a tribunal vested with disciplinary powers, and not a court, limited in its functions within the provisions of the constitution. Removal affirmed.
    
      A. H. Purdy, for appellant, Anderson.
    
      J. F. Daly, for respondents, board-of police.
   Barnard, P. J.

There is sufficient proof to establish the

charge made against the relator. It is only partially denied. The proceedings were regularly, instituted. A charge was formally made and served upon the relator, and he had notice of the hearing before the commissioners, and duly attended, and was himself sworn in Iris own defense. The only question, therefore, for this court to determine is whether the charge itself was one sufficient to call for the relator’s dismissal, if true.

The relator was a policeman of the city of Yonkers. He is proven to have falsely stated that one of his associates on the police force was guilty of a-grave, immoral act, and one. injurious not only to him, but as implicating an associate in guilt with him. The relator, in addition, tried to get the false statement published in a largely circulated newspaper. Such conduct is injurious to the public peace and welfare, and is unbecoming a police officer. By the falsehood the respect for the police is weakened and a lack of friendly unity is created in the force itself. There can be no properly disciplined force, such as the service demands, if the members are permitted to falsely accuse each other of immoral and disgraceful offenses. The commissioners constituted a “tribunal vested with disciplinary powers, and not a court limited in its functions within the provisions of the constitution.” People ex rel., etc., v. Police Commissioners, 95 N. Y., 97.

The removal of the relator by the commissioners is therefore affirmed, with costs and disbursements.

Dykmak, J., concurs.  