New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1873-07-15
DOCS IN THE MANGER.
Congresses.


DOGS IN THE MANGER.
Yesterday we had occasion to say IN ehect,-
and we said it with reluctance,-that the
eight Aldermen who evade the responsibility
of confirming or rejecting the Mayors nomi-
nations are playing the part of towards mat
article had the effect of forcing from the
leaders of the combination explanations which
would lead us to conclude that they are some
thing worse. Their action and their explana-
tons made yesterday clearly show them 10 De
without defense for a conspiracy which only
some bad political purpose could nave sug-
gested. What it is we have no means
of knowing certainly; we can oniy
puess that the present Police Justices
who failed in every device OF argument or
subscription to induce majority OF the Leg
islature to save them from official decaplta-
ton have found more plant tools or wiling
allies in the eight obstructiOnists OF the BOARD
of Aldermen. This is the attitude selected TOT
themselves by these northumberland that
there may be no mistake we name those we
mean,-Messrs. Van SChaick. Kehr, and Koch
of the Custom-house Republicans, Mr.. Mon
heimer of the Apollo Hall Democracy, and the
four Tammany Hall Democrats, Messrs. Elan
nagan, Lysaght, McCafferty, and Riley. 1t ls
in this attitude they now appear before the
people, and in it they must stand OF fall.
Fall, we should say, is decidedly the word,
for we do not think these gentlemen are
strong enough to resist long reform winch
has for two years been irresistible.
And to this complexion the Aldermanic
wrangle comes, after all is said and done.
They are simply cautiously opposing Reform.
These eight men were lifted from obscurity
into their places by the flood-tide of refor-
nation in which, happily for themselves, they
had not been previously drowned. main
purpose of that Reform movement was the
deposition from their places of power OF Ju-
dicial officers who had betrayed their trust.
MeCunn, Barnard and Cardozo were driven
from the bench to disgraceful death or ,gno-
minious obscurity Others of the Supreme
bench spared because of their age, were
forced to practice honesty they had long since
been strangers to; and the worst justices oil
the minor courts were frightened into dis
pensiDg fairly the judgments which they had
formerly sold to the highest bidders among
the corrupt lawyers who practiced IN
their courts. All this is notorious
and no man who knows anything oil
the administration of justice in this city
doubts that these minor courts were the most
oppressiye, as against the liberty of the largest
number of citizens, of all the courts OF the
district. Not ALL but certainly majority OF
these Judges sold their judicial decisions
openly. There are afidavits and testimony
before the Mayor, and subject to the inspec-
ton of the Aldermen, which show conclusively
that the worst of the whole set of Police JUS
tees bartered the successful practice OF his
court for certain percentage OF lawyers
fees, and sold warrants of arrest and writs OF
habeas corpus by the score. What he prac-
ticed largely, many-not all-of the Ponce
Justices of New-York have done in lesser de-
gree.
II is this gang of legal cut-throats whom the
eight Aldermen are combined to keep Ill Office.
There is nothing else, apparently, to inspire
their action. Their excuses are frivolous and
confess their betrayal of Reform Alderman
Van Schaick, rising to explain his motives,
insults his colleagues, his constituency and
common sense in saying that if the Mayor
"would tell him what persons had influenced
chin to make the nominations he would be
"perfectly willing to give his reasons for not
"voting to confirm themn This is not merely
childish; it is deliberately insulting to the
Reform party, which elected both Mr.. Van
Schaick and Mr.. Havemeyer. The Mayor can
not be called upon to give any such explana-
ton. He has taken the responsibility OF naming
his men now let Alderman Van Schaick assume
the responsibility of voting to reject them, as
we have no hesitation in saying we hope he
will vote. Mr.. Kehr, rising to another ex-
PLANTATION, puts his refusal TO vote on the
ground that the act is thought to be uncon-
stitutional. All the more reason he should
vote to reject the nominees, as We hope he
will vote. He fears litigation. 1t is none of
his business whether the Police Justices con-
test their places with the new appointees; it
is the Courts and not the Board Of Aldermen
which attend to such litigation. The simple
truth is that the Aldermen are absolutely
without defense in an action which is prompted
by the narrowest of partisan views, and which
obstructs the advance of the broadcast munich
pal reform.
There is no reason why we should not say
now, as we have said before, that we do not
think all the Mayors nominees for Police
Justices ought to be confirmed. In fact we
would be glad to see the most of them re-
jected, for then we might obtain better
list of nominations. But nothing in the
character of untried men warrants the Alder
men in inaction which keeps in place ten
others who have been tried and found sadly
wanting.
WHAT WILL BE THINK OF USf
Americans have been accused of undue SEN
aitiveneaa in regard tn foreipn oninion ond