The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1857-05-28


vscesry."
There are victories which cost too dear, and In
this category may be claseed the triumph claio-
ed by the organs Of the Albany consprators In
the recent decision Of the Supreme Court 1t Ia
one of those successes which leave the victoTs in
worse position than before, inasmuch as it de-
cides by anticipation their ultimate defeat
It cannot be disguised that the decision of the
judicial majority, although apparently In theil
favor, is pregnant with modification and discom-
future to the party Of the usarpation- Its omis-
sions and reluctantly implied concessions are as
iwportant to the only issue for which the city
feels sny concern as any of its more positive con-
illusions. We never denied to the worthy cow
keepers and village pettifoggers composing the
Legislature the right to commit whatever legis-
iative eccentricitie they pleased provided always
that they did not run O muck at vested rights.
The legislation Of the last session, marked as 1t
was by levity, ignorance and indecent haste,
would have excited only our derision and con-
tempt had we not been 30 largely the
sufferers by the corrupt influences which
took advantage Of these prevailing features.
We should have troubled ourselves but little
about surplas Legislation for our city, provided
II in no way disturbed or interfered with on, ex-
iaing municipal organization. On the contrary,
we should rather have rejolced In the bull head
ednem which would insist upon multiplying our
means Of protection ct the expense Of other parts
of the State. 1t was only when the shoe pinched
us in the wrong place thai we felt 1t necessary to
cry out. And it was only the one point in the
issues submitted to the decision of the Supreme
Court which covered this grievance namely, the
injustice and illegality Of the pretension set up
by the Legislature to abrogate in our municipal
organization the principle Of selfgovernment,
consecrated as it is by the constitution and by
our ancient charters, in which we felt any para
mount interest. Singular to say, the decision of
the judicial majority leaves this point untouched,
except by implication, whilst it confirms what
we never denied.
The net value of the judgment of the Supreme
Court to the Albany coDspirators amounts,
therefore, simply to this. They are permitted to
do to us what they never meant to do-namely,
all the good they can, whilst their power for mis-.
chief is effectually checked and restrained
by it. Thus, for instance, they can confer upon
the city the advantages Of coordinate police
nominees but neither directly nor indirectly can
they interfere with the old organization. By a
happy blunder they have given rs the benefits Of
the London system, in which government and
city police force act Independently Of but harmo-
niously with each other.
To the city authorities the results of this de-
cision are of much greater value Constructive
y the judgment Of the majority admits all that
they centended for, namely, the powerleSness of
The Legislature to abrogate any of their charter
ID rights, whilst in express terms Judge Roose-
Telt decides that any invasion of those rights is
and Illegal. We gain, in fact,
N InQS6 from the timidity and feebleness of the
judicial majority as we do from the superior le-
gal intellect, clear headedness and uprightness of
the dissenting Judge.
Thus far, then, the view taken by Mayor Wood
and his colleagues Of their duty in this crisis has
been fully sustained by the law. They have as
serted no claim and defended no right which
they were not legally as well as morally
justified in doing. The lawmakers have
in this instance, as well as in others, proved
themselves the law breakers, and we look to the
decision Of the Court Of Appeals for fuller and
more unequivocal condemnation of their acts
What the result will he of such decision we
need scarcely point out Albany legislation has
already sunk 20 low in public opinion that II
requires but another, in addition 10 The many
defeats it has already sustained in the courts, TO
set people thinking about radical change of
some sort.
In the meanwhile the city authorities have
another duty to perform. 1t is not sufficient that
they should assert their rights, but they must
also exercise them. They must put to legal
test all the powers and functions which the
Legislature has sought 10 nullify. Fortified by
The decision of the Supreme Court, they must
raw tighter their control over the police; sum
marily dismiss all refractory members; expel
by force if necessary, all persons intruding
themselves into their station houses to create dis
affection and resistance among the men; aud re-
store the police organization TO what il was
previous TO this daring invasion of their autho-
rity-a united, obcdicnt and effective body. Let
them not hesitate to act with the same decision
and iirmness in regard to the other Jurisdictions
assailcd by these enactments. Their right to
control the plans and expenditures of the new
City Hall and the Central Park is not less clear
and incontestible than their authority over the
police. Let them take all the formal steps ne
cessary to the exercise of that right, leaving to
their opponents the onus and legal penalties Of
resistance. With regard 10 the powers claimed
by the new Excise Commissioners il is for the
trade rather than the city authorities to test their
force. The Maine law has removed the burthcn
Of that question from the shoulders Of the Corpo-
ration. To the assertion that the decision of
the Supreme Court will psralyze for time the
resistance of Mayor Wood and his coleagues 20