The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-07-07
Beginning OF Judicial RevOlutioR-Ths De
cisIon of the Court OF Appeals.

clstOn Oh the Court OF AppealSs
The construction given by the Court Of Appeals
al Albany to the constitution Of the State of New
York is virtually declaration by that tribunal
of the necessity of such peaceful revolution as
will eventuate in the proper amendment Of that
organic law. 1t Is a declaration which the peo-
would do well to study and to act on. If they
bow eubmissively to the continued operation Of
such an anti-republican charter as the Court Of
Appeals practically, if not in 30 many words
aihrms our constitution to be, they will stultify
themselves and the trainers Of our institutions,
and signify their preference for an oligarchical
over democratic form of government
What was the simple question submitted to the
srbitrament and adjudication Of the Court of
Appeals. II was whether under the constitu-
ton of this State, the people of coun-
ties, towns, cities and villages possess the
rights which they have always exercised,
Of local selfgovernment To that gues-
ton the court Of last resort returns
negative reply. II Gays in effect, "No; your
supposed right Of self government is mere hal
lucnation. So long az the Legislature permits
you TO indulge in the luxury of self-government
you may, Of course, enjoy it, but you have no
legal or constitutional claim TO it, 1t is a sort of
plaything vouchsafed to you for awhile, TO be
resumed a! the pleasure Of the Legislature Of the
State"
New, sssumng an We are bound 10 co. that
this Interpretation By the learned tribunal is q
correct one, il follows that the citizens Of this
great metropolis and the citizens Of evay portion
of the State are just as dependent on the central
! power at Albany as the people Of a department
or prefecture or municipality in France arc on
the central power at Paris il must have very
much astonished intelligent people in New Yofk
and in the State at large, 10 learn from the deci-
zion Of the Court OF Appeals that such wa
the case. We had always lsttered ourselves
that our right to local selfgovernmeni waa
not only inherent, but was also with jealous
| care guarded, hedged round, and secured to uf
by the constitution. But now we learn, to our in.
tense CONSERVATION, that oil this was a delusien
and that we really possess neither the inherent
nor the constitutional right to local self.goyern
ment, which is the basis Of republicanism. Thu
decision Of the Court Of Appeals therefore, ha
not only violated what We always believed 10 b
our rights, but has swept away one of the .'uail
pillar Of our system Of government FIVE asse.'
quietly 10 this deprivation Of liberty, and take
not the proper measures to remedy the evil, this
boosted repubIcanism Of ours is not worth pin Z
purchase.
The reasoning on which the Court arrived at
its ctaelusion is Of very remarkable character
The majority OF the Court-that is, sx out of
eght-admit to lis fullest extent the principle
contendcd Tor by the opponents Of the Metro.
politan Police bill, that one of the primary
objects contemplated Wy the constitution of 1876
was to deccniralize power, to take Out of
the hands Of the Executive the undue patro-
mage which il had hitherto exercised. and 10 re.
pose that patronage where II properly belonged.
in the people. The Judges admit all ,bat and
admit, too, that the Legislature cannot tranoro.s
the barriers erected to secure the right Of local
fgoyernmcnt-the right Of the electors of
counties, towns, cities and villages to select the
officers Of their respective localities. But they
say and here comes the extraordinary point of
their reasoning-that although the Legislature
cannot assume the appointment Of county or
city officers, il may usurp that right by merely
resortiDg 10 nc legislative ho-a pery Of oularc