The Rock Island daily Argus. [volume] (Rock Island, Ill.) 1872-1873, 1873-07-28
rHELAH IN TIE CASE

had been removed from office by the Way
ar The Board then appointed Commit
tee 70 inquire and report who were mem
hers. etc. 1t would have been just as well
10 have directed the Chairman Of the Iii
brary Board 10 write note to the Mayor
and ask the question, for that is all the
Committee will be justified in doing No
Committee has power 70 decide who Is
mr. who is not a member Of the Board.
The Mayor decides that question, and as
far as the law is concerned, entirely upon
reasons satisfactory 70 himself There Is
no appeal TO the Council from his decision
while the present law is in force. 1
On the 7th Of March, 1872, an act OF
the Legislature of this State in regard &c .
Public Libraries became law, and 1t pro F.
vided that
The Mayor may. by and with the consent Of The
CITY Council remove any Director Tor ml-''h1Net
or neglect Of DUTY
Under that law. a. it then stood, the
Mayor could not remove Director with
out the consent Of the Council But, two
DAYS afterwards, another act Of the Legs
lation was approved which provided that
any city officer OF any member Of any
Board. not elected by the people or ap-
pointed by the Governor
may he removed bv TIE Mayor Whenever. N
HIS the Mayor OPINION the interests Of the
cry may require such removal but he shs! report
HE reasons f0T such removal 10 the Legislative
ut Il fr U5sN
ing"
This law supersedes and overrides all
previous laws, in this respect: The consent
oT the CoHaeH Is not necessary 70 rsD'oraS.
Nor are causes for the removal specified.
Whenever, in the Mayor opinion, the in
terests Of the City require a change he
is authorized 10 make it. And when he
makes a removal it is final and irrevoca-
ble, as far a. the man removed Is con
cerned. He is out aud cant get back
without the Mayor consent. Had this
not been the intention Of the Legislature,
some proyiso 70 the contrary would have
I been inserted in the act. There Is no such
proyiso. The power is absolute and uncon-
[ ditional in the Mayor TO make any
! such removal whenever he pleases.
and for reasons satisfactory to himself.
/ 1t Is perfectly evident that this was the in
/ teution Of the Legislature The men who
made the Mayors law knew what they
were doing. They knew the Mayor was
responsible u the whole people for GOOD
government ia the City. They knew that
absolute power 70 make removals must
rest somewhere, and, following the princi-
pie Of power in the hands Of the President,
they placed il 10 the bands of the Mayor
When be makes removal that is the end
Of that man. officially Neither the Coun-
ell nor any other power can prevent it,
without some new legislation But he
must report. in writing, TO the Council, his
reasons. though the Council has nothing
whatever to do with his reasons. except 10
hear them Any reason, satisfactory Il
the Mayor fills the requirements Of the
Iaw. Nor j. the Council authorized Il
take any action whatever upon his reasons
They simply go on file, without any motion
whatever
But the Council Is authorized o tak'
, advisory action upon the Mayor : appoint
mcu,s. It has nothing whatever 10 d,
with hi, removals, any more than the [ ;
Senate had with Haverstick's remova
from the Office Of Postmaster in this city
The President had the absolute and un
conditional power 10 remove bim,a he ha
TO remove any aud every officer Of tn
Army and Navy.
e A. to new appointments, they are Off
= GERS from the date the Mayor appoint
them. Bat he is required, at the frs
regular meeting, to submit his appoint
s. meuts for the approval Of the Council, an
II a majority Of all the members elect. b
G yeas and nays. TO be entered upon it, JON
2 nal, Is necessary 10 confirm hi- appoin
e ments. But suppose a majority Of all III
e member. elect should not vote to c1ntiri
:. an appointment Why, the Mayor coult
d a. soon as the Council had adjourned, r.
I appoint the same man, and hl- appointmel
4 would hold good until the next regul;
d meeting. 1t would require this operate
TO be repeated only twelve times to con
d plete d year. This, however, would
lie exercising power tyranncally, and wou
only be justified in case the Council shOu
Improperly reject an appointmer
Suppose which is scarcely
a supppsable ease that the Cou
to I'll should, out OF mere spite, or Win
~ Or excitement, or from some personal n
d public, reason, reject an appointment
q that case the Mayor would be justified
Of reappointinp the man, and continuing
.r 10 80 once a month during the year. Pre-
er ,dents Of the United States have done tn
ut, and been justified in it. Gen. jackson q
is it IN several instances and was enthusi;
Ir tically sustained If, however, the Cou
De- cll reject an appointment because Of
IT eligibility, incapacity, bad character or
TX any good public reason against the titnt
NJ Df the person appointed, then the May
t. would not be justified in persisting in
w, appointing the man, but should Apo
jat some other man, against whose appol
TX, mcnt and fitness no good public reasC
could be urged
The same law and the same reasoni
nm, applies to the Mayor action on the Wa
Board
The Committee of Directors Of the
brary have no power whatever to dec
who is or who is not a Director and p
pcrly can only inquire of the Mayor v
tch is and who is not Director, and SO repC
hit Any other proceeding on the part of
DR. Committee would be an unwarranted
mes sumption of power, not justified by a
ION. thing in the law or out Of it.
out As 70 the prOnrietv mr. necessity If