Show THE PRATT CASE Petition For Mandamus Heard Before Be-fore Judge Miles The hearing on the petition of Arthur Pratt for a writ of mandate against the board of police and fire commissioners to compel the board to reinstate him to the office of chief of police was had yesterday evening before Judge lilIes in the district court Judge Powers and Attorney Walde mar Van Cott appeared for the petitioner peti-tioner and City Attorney McKay and Assistant City Attorney Hempstead and Attorney H J Dinmny represented the board Judge Powers read the petition in which the fact of Pratts dismissal in December last and his reinstatement by order of the supreme court in July his immediate suspension thereafter and the tiling of charges against him were set forth also the commencement of the board to hear the case against him and the sudden termination of the trial on account of Commissioner Ken yon refusing to sit In the case and Pratts demand for a trial by the full board are set out Since then it is alleged nothing has been done in the matter and that it is not the intention of the board to proceed with the trial but on the contrary con-trary to let the matter remain in data quo and keep the petitioner out of ofllce until the end of this year when the board sees cut c > f existence Wherefore Where-fore the petitioner prays for a writ of mandate to compel the board to restore Sir Pratt to the office of chief of police of Salt Lake City Counsel for the board filed a demurrer demur-rer setting up that the court has no jurisdiction of the person of the defendant de-fendant nor of the subject of the action ac-tion and that the complaint does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action Ain answer was also filed danyinep all tGie material allegations of tihe com pCaint and allegvns that Otto trial of Pratt en tub charges iviU be proceeded with as soon as CommIssioner Kenyan is prepared to sit witih the other mem bors of the beard ninth it is prayed that a writ issue frtom tine court to made member of the beard commanding them all to meet as a board and try the case aaainsit Prwtt Secretary Pelt of the board of DoHce ainii fire ccmrni isLoner3 was examiner a > ml identified the transcript of the minutes cf the proceedingrs of the beard and record of tlhe trial of Pratt as far as it lead gone when Mr Konron retired re-tired from the case Since Aug 25 no proceedings had been had in the matter of the trial neat no date was sat for further hearing The stenographic praceediniss of the trial before the bcctrd were put ia eii deuce Mr Pratt went on the stand tio make formal proof of his appointment as clhtef of police tin suBpenslon and c > o foniti Witness also testified that he bad no notice of a day being set for the resumption of his trial and as far as he knew ro day has been set Cress exaMitoal by Judge McKay Mr Prate said tha in Juy ha received notce cC CIB astateoieut and on time fcOov tug iroiji ocr went to the office at the city hall but tEd not give any ordars to tlii men or assume the duties of ctlef of police for the leasma that tea knew he was gang to be suspandail at 3 ocJock that afternoon and sue gtered to be lihe case OarnmiiFStitter Kenyort testlifled 15i3t tfiere wad linen at lart one meeting or tifce boarI wita ail the mraiorj pres eat smote tbs trial stopped on Aug 25 Questioned bv Mr Ilemrftea1 as to whether the rnesUaGr referred to was purely liar routine buoness or not ilaa wJtJMS said tier CiU ether buinfis packed a Tesolutitii extoIMas the roe levee airil altosetiiar had a very inter eating mttting TPie riaicilff pasted ard Vis deferiw callad Ccemmcescmnor DLrc roy who mtiU only cme meeting wilt a foil beard had been lietti yatre Aug 25 that wax on Aug 27 The UcarU lisd not adjouiivl nIne die K regain to ilia Pratt case bu Intended to go on with tIme tr al as attn as a boonl legally constituted ccnd be obtained Attorney Van Colt opened tire arRii meats < for the pstlticassr urgIng that as the beard vas sow con titutiJ Pratt never would be tried acid that toe court stioutd rc < ncitatc hum Judge Hilus CouM not this court 13 I rue a writ coiKCnarssr 1c boarU to do j He duty In answer to thte Mr Van Cott argncd that the board vas mat quoIISod to try the case because of too prejudice of Jlr Noble and Mr DJainny 0 = 81 niit Froittt Sir Van Cott was foUmvcil by Judi c Powers who s > ncJ < e very briefly on tiic same lives as Mr Van Cott Mr Heppsead on iitihalf of the beard argued on the demurrer first aating that Pratt had ncit been rcimovel but only stsp9nflcd and that tie prayer < io rs istate htoiwas ORttirnr UhaboavU t3 dOan dO-an SmposeJMnty CertiOrari counsel contended con-tended was Prastts proper and ciir remedy Further hearing was tlwn postponeS until Saturday next |