The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-06-14
How IL Ia Done.


WHEN some member Of Councils Is SO far for
getful Of the customs of those bodies as to
introduce bill really demanded for the public
good, and which in its action does not tend to
enrich the favorites Of any of our city fathers,
the majority are placed in remarkably un-
fortunate condition. They are determined not
TO sacrifice their personal feelings for the
public benefit, yet at the same time they dare
not vote against the bill, because of the med
ding interlopers of the press, who do not
hesitate to let their constituents know all
about their actions. In this dilemma, ruse
is adopted, which saves their feelings and
wards off the indignation of the people they
are supposed to represent. 1t is discovered
that the bill must be investigated on some
legal points, and so it is moved
that it be referred TO the Committee on Law il
its death is necessary, or to some other legisla-
tive cemetery if it is not of vital Importance
that it be killed. When once in the hands of
the Committee, we never hear anything more
of it. If the mover of the resolution calls for
his offspring, the Chairman reports progress,
and the bill is thus omitted without attracting
too great attention from the public. Now this
plan is worse than deliberate defeat, because
it shows that the members are not only untrue
to their constituents, but also that they are
towards They dare not defend their own
actions, yet have not public spirit enough to
yield their bitter personal prejudces to the
requirements of the city.
AS long as this device was used in an exoep-
tional case we did not object, but when we
see it not only a daily but an hourly practice,
and when all legislation is transferred from
Councils, where the press is admitted, to a
Committee which sits with closed doors, we
do most earnestly protest against such
shirking of responsibility. Within a few
weeks we have had too many instances o.
this choking off of bills. The Board of Health
appropriation was sent to special committee,
which failed yesterday to report. The motion
was merely another way of defeating what is
imperatively demanded, and we brand such
legislation as false and cowardly. The city is
in danger of disease, and her Councils,
because of personal spite against the Board
of Health, refuse to supply the money to
render us safe. They dare not defeat the
bill, so they send it to a committee, and that
is the end of it. The case of f. A. Van Cleve,
two weeks since, was treated in the
same manner. Without a shadow of legal
right to his illgotten place, he is allowed to
hold it, because Mr.. Wagner, or some other
accessory, is unwilling to report the bill.
Yet the Committee on Law signed report
ten days ago, and there have been two meet
ings since. 1t is time that we have some re-
form in this mode of legislation. 1t is proper
to send legal question to a committee, in
order to prevent crude and illegal action, but
it is not necessary to send such a motion as
the Board of Health appropriation. Let the
law be so amended that every committee is com
PEELED to report at the neat meeting. If it re-
quires more time, let the question be re-
ferred once more to it, if Councils think
more time is necessary. But let us do away
with this cowardly committee system now
in vogue. 1t is quite time some new device
be invented to kill good bills. The old one
has worked too long. Let Wagner and Van
Cleve concoct something new, for the present
plan has grown to be offensive to the people.