New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-09-15
TpE GOVERNORS DECISION.
SAFE OF NEW YORK. EXECUTIVE CHANBET
ATnASY srut IA 1874.

r. Havemeyer, Mayer of the City of New-York
IL has been customary in cases Of accusation against
public officers with view 10 their removal under tue
authority cOuAded by the Constitution and laws 10 the
Chief Magistrate OF the State 10 direct an inquiry INTO
the truth OF against them by the examina
ton OF the witnesses before q county judge or some
other person designated for the purpose In this case
deemed It due the Office Of Chef Magistrate OF the
first city In the State to await his answer before proceed
ing any further The answer when received seeneu 10
me 70 render such an inquiry needless, and It was not
IN fact desired either the aceusers or the accused
The nrncnal facts which constitute the gravRmen OF
the accusation are in dispute They are admitted
IN the answer as fully as they are set forth IN the
charges and only remains for the Executive to deter
mine whether they constitute proper case for the exer
else Of the power Of removal The charges presented to
me are embodied in i've papers or petitions, vzi
l. petition signed by and verified by the affidavit OF
Sepitia1 signed by John p Crosby. Joseph c. Jack
son, WIN. NJ Prtchard, G. A. Hand, Benj d. sherman
WIN. c. Barrett ana A. a RedhelI. o.. r, D..
series OF resolutions adopted by the Board Of Al
& Charges and specifications presented by Oswald
-Ottendorfer, John Kelly, aud Wm II. "lcAhAm' ana
verified Dy the affidavit OF the former. -, ,r,- -.
The first two Of these papers are Identical Ihey are
both together with the last, sustained by documentary
evidence. and all OF them concur IN aSAnS 1ao Cne
Mayor may be removed from his Office Ihe charges
against him in the last Of the i've enumerated papers
though supported by voumnous specifications may be
pretty summed MP as follows: .,. -, -
oscai conduct OF Oliver Charlick aud Hugh Gardner
Police Commissioners OF the City or New y Ork; and
inS mower. by Responding Oliver Charlick and Hugh
eriner 10 the Office OF Police Commissioner after Their
conviction OF Ofense involving violation OF thelr
oetbs OF Office and in assigning one TO the
vacancy created by the other for the purpose OF eyadg
fhe proyons the law; thus bringing The admnlstra
zion OF Justice into contempt, aud degrading the
public morality by protecting the victims OF the Criminal
third charge Of Improper conduct in Office" has
single specification consisting OF deducuoas from tne
aeour IA
irons first mentioned set forth the facts on which the
second OF above three charges are fOunded the con-
vicuon of Charck and Gardner and their sub
seauent reappOmtDent after notice from the Governor
fhat fney we're convicted of mlsdemeanor involving
violation of OF Office aud creating VACANCIES
which the Mayor Vas REQUIRED, 10y Isw 20 tho Pec
tons also that each was assigned 70 Tue
created by the The petition signed oy Elw0od r.
horpe and Others. contains the further charge OF fail
ing investigate certain oucia deIlque1cles 10 the
BOARD of Charities aud COrrecuOn-an investigation
which is shown by documentary evidence TO have been
already made-aud also the Charge OF a1tenptlLg 70
control the action and usdrp the functions OF the
Police COMMENCEMENT accusation not so supported
by specifications as TO require II 10 DC met except Ny
general denial .,. l.. -,
n 10 invesgate the official conduct OF Oliver Chariick
and Hugh Gardner Police Commissioners. the speci-
ng 10 Rnresu OF tne Police Board and Cd Ia
refusing 10 investigate the alleged misconduct OF tue
police Commissioners in respect TO the general election
of November, 1873.
sTREET-CLEASING ABUSES.
In regard to first branch Of this charge OF neglect
of duty 10 appears that investigation made Of
the management Of the STRENGTHENING Department in
February and March last, under the order Of the As
semDy. by the Committee the Affairs of Cities Of
which Mr. Eastman was Chairman: and that the Com
mttee after most searching inquiry into the whole
subject reported as the result VI 1nelr nvestgaton
= the large expenditure Of SlO95OOO IN street
cleaning had not been wisely OF economically expended
d That the Board OF Police had shown a culpabe
want efficiency and lack Of kill system, ana econ
Omy aud that the entire system OF STRENGTHENING, as
conducted by them, mad been an imposition upon the
g. That the heads Of the street-cleanng Bureau aud
many Of their subOrdiuates negligent and ignorant
their dues, that sources OF were neglected.
and that more or less OF tue proceeds we're applied to
a That the street-cleanlng Bureau had been crippled
IN It's operations by the employment OF incompetent
labOrers; aud.
Tha the Police BOARD and police force had failed to
ordinances relating 20 garbage. the enforce
ment OF which necessary TO improve the sanitary
The Committee came unanimously to the conclusion
that the Police 8oard did not occupy the position Of
who recognized their hrst duty TO be TO the great
mass OF the people, and that any permanent improve
ueBt could Only De expected from reconstruction OF
the Board IL appears Also that the Board OF Alder
men seconded the suggestion OF tue Committee Of the
Assembly In favor OF reconstruction OF the Board Of
Police by resolution adopted on the 2Osh OF April last
calling on the Mayor TO suspend ana Remove the Police
Commissioners.
To the communication OF the Board Of Aldermen the
Mayor replied on the lth Of May, aud while processing
Assembly, though held Ia The City OF NewYork, IN
vesugating under his department OF the NUM-
OF which, under the charter OF the city, he held
responsible he did not scrupe 10 intimate that had
ana that the proceedings partOOk too much Of polt-
zeal character 10 command either the confidence
spect Of the community" The Committee whose pro-
ceedugs were thus ignored, whose character for
impariaity was thus gratutousy tmpeacned, was Que
OF the permanent committees or the Assembly, APP
pointed at the organization OF the Legislature by the
Speaker with careful regard important interests
intrusted 20 II, and having upon IL Of the most
honorable ana conspicuous members OF the legislative
body and OF the nine gentlemen WHO composed the
Committee SIX we're OF the political party by whose
votes mainly the Mayor elected 20 Office.
As a further Justification for declining take any
u Police Commissioners he
alleged that there specific charges against them
aud offered 70 enter Investigation Of their
AZ the Board of Aldermen would make charges which
they were prepared 10 substantiate."
Upon this ntinaton the Board OF Aldermen appointed
Especial Committee, 70 whom the Mayors communities
captivating the proceedings and recommendation of
the Committee OF the Assembly setting forth the alleged
"a tho rOiee Nonn ssl0nefs IN regard 90 the
genera erection o. 1873 aud again calling on the MAYOR
to RECONSTRUCT the Board This report was adood he
the AIDE men anu copy served on the Mayor on the
10Th OF May On the 4h OF June the Mayor rsped aosn
.alleglHg that there specnc charges asns ~
Commissioners OF Police. but pledged hlmaeT 1bs. a
thorough investigation shOnd be once proepede6 vtn
under bis Immediate supervision and tha, ~
Aldermen should be duly appFlsed. 80 that thew n,
produce any facts within their knowledge. This assnr
kDce was not Il!nued
FOLLY OF INSISTING UPON SPECIFIC CHANGES
The position taken by the Mayor that be not In
vesgse the alleged misconduct Of the Ponce Commis.
them indeiensibe any recognized principle Of gov
eminent 1t the law OF all administrations OF
power that the chief authority shall watch over the
departments subordinate him. aud that their fnnc-
tons are faithfully executed 1t his province TO d-
rect the proper legal ocer frame and submit charges
on any allegation OF misconduct with probable ca use
n5soao VI leaVlng service pertaining 20 his own
sphere OF duty 70 be performed BY other departments or
by private individuals having only eomnon inferesf
=" ythers ID the proper management OF the public