The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1874-03-10
THE BOARD OF ASSISTANT AL
DERMEN.

Election Of Assistant Alderman Strack
rs President Susta aimed by the Supreme
Court, General Term-The Opinion of
Chief Justice Davis.
The legal dispute over the election OF President
of the Assistant Board of Aldermen, and how, as
between the contestants, Wade and Strack, the
case came before the Supreme Court General
Term, for decision, are matters Of recent and IA
mar history. A decision IN the case was rem
dered yesterday morning to the effect that nothing
In the charter prohibits the reorganization of the
Board of Assistant Aldermen at any time, and the
action Of that body IN recently electing Assistant
Alderman Strack as Its President is therefore sus
tanned. Judges Donohue and Daniels concur in
this decision. Judge Davis presented o lengthy
opinion, the principal points OF. which are EN-
braced in an epitome OF the same given below
OPINION OF JUDGE DAVIS.
After stating the facts OF the case he states that
ident OF the Board of Assistant Aldermen by death
or resignation, or removal OF the incumbent from
the city, or any other event, the Board Is clothed
with ample power Ito choose president from its
own members, " under section OF the new char
ter. The act OF making such choice would not be
recognizing" within the sense within which that
word Is used in the act The intent of the restrc-
ton was to prevent the substitution OF new or
ganizatlon for the existing one while the latter
was in full force and OPERATION aud not to prevent
that kind OF reorganization which springs from the
terms of oflce. The disposition of the case de-
pended upon whether the respondents election
was made to supplant an existing office by re-
moving him from o continuing term, or to fill q
vacancy which had occurred from the expiration
Of an official term and that in turn depended
upon the question whether the resolution of the
Board passed at the election Of the reator de-
clarng him TO be elected president for the year
1873 was lawful designation or limitation OF his
term of Office. Had the Board the power to make
the reator president for one year. leaving the sue
cession for the second year open to a further
choice, or was 1t bound to elect one for all and for
the full period Of the term of assistant alderman
The charter of 1870, under which Mr.. Wade was
elected. contained no declared term of of1ice.
The statute sec. Revised Statutes) there
fore provided that the ONCE should "be
held during the pleasure Of the author
ity making the appointment" That pleasure
was declared by the resolution eectlng Mr.
Wade for The year 1873. Did the provisions of the
charter Of 1873 land when once chosen he cannot
be removed before the expiration OF his term as
alderman or assistant alderman only by q vote
taken on call Of the yeas and nays Of four-nfths
OF all the members OF the BOard,n operate to ex-
tend the duration OF the REALTORS ONCE beyond
the year 1878 ? This language not retroactive.
Statutes were not applied retrOspectively by mere
construction. In conclusion the Court holds that
beyond that for which the Board had chosen him !;
that on the expiration Of that term his office was
vacant by lapse OF time, and that, until his sue
cessor was chosen, he was discharging the duties
by force OF the general statute which provides for
such discharge and that the Board, after such ex-
piration OF the term, was, in choosing his sue
cessor, acting upon an exigency which required no
removal, and was exercising It's original and law
full authority.