The New Orleans crescent. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1866-1869, 1869-02-27
The NEW CHARTER.

4
One Of our contemporaries, in its edition OF
last evening, makes the first attempt to dis
euss the question OF the projected city char
ter, IN rational manner, that has come under
our observation, and we must do it the justice
70 say that its argument is not deficient in
piauslbility. If the subject had been rea-
soned thus from the beginning, there would
have been no iIl-temper on either side. We
take 1t that the desire of the press, as well as
OF the people, is to assure to the city an eff
clent and honest government; and if, in the
natue Of things, such a contamination is
unattainable, then to approximate it as nearly
as circumstances will permit. This being
admitted, it is entirely irrelevant to accuse
those who object to the change of yenal and
corrupt motives, or those who favor IL of
selfish desires and interested ambition. Dis
missing such methods, therefore, we recur 10
the argument of our contemporary. 1t is
truly stated to be one of the objections to the
projected charter that it will vest too great
powers In the reduced numbers of the admin
lstrators; that the liability to corruption and
other influences will be increased, and large
powers may be exercised without restraints
orproper checks" The answer to this ia that
each administrator viii be held to direct.
distinct and certain responsibility for the
transactions of his department.. But the
assertion of such distinct, direct and certain
responsibility is totally unsupported by proof.
On the contrary, the responsibility of the
administrators is next to nothing at all. In the
hrst place they are to hold Office for four years.
and during that time there is no check upon
them, except the uncertain influence of a
public opinion which has no means of making
itself felt. No provision is made for the i'm
parchment OF the administrators in case of
even notorious malfeasance in Office, and even
were such provision made it would be inoper-
alive, because the administrators being the
legislative as well as thelexecutive body. yould
scarcely try and convict themselves. This
dlthculty seems to have made itselffelt by orr
and hence it is proposed TO |
MAKE these officers eriminally liable for fraud |
and corruption in Office. But, in the first |
place there is no such provision in the new
charter, and IN the next place, even were it
added, 1t would be a nullity. The experience |
Oh the internal revenue department of the
United States government, shows the futility
Of such laws. That department is analogous
10 those which the new charter proposes to
'reate IN our municipal government, except
hat the commissioner is under the control of
congress, and does not himself constitute
portion of the legislative body, and is.
therefore,, more responsible than the proposed
administrators. Congress has adopted with |
elerence to the officers of this department |
rom the commissioners down, the Yery expe-
lent suggested for guaranteeing the honest
onduct OF our government under the pro-
'cted charter they are made eriminally liable
u fraud and corruption. Yet the name of
he internal revenue department is suggestive I
corruption so deeply seated that the gov. :
utterly despairs Of eradicating it or b
bringing the offenders to justice. In fact.
10 an admitted principle now that official | !,
auds will exist in direct ratio to the on. =
'rtunity for committing them, the security I,
Tered by penal laws being an inappreciable Y
anent in the problem. They can be cured ct
ly IN two ways, either by removing the op-
rtunity or by assuring the integrity of u
G Official. The new charter does neither 8
these things-on the contrary, it aug ID
ants the opportunity, and by augmenting =,
3 opportunity it increases the difficulty Of -
'uring official honesty. In both of these sb
rteulars, therefore, it is less desirable than in
, present system. ia