New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-01-05
UPPEAgAL IN THE LAW DEPARTMENT.
rTiE REMOVAL or THE CORPORATION COUNSEL
THREATENED BY THE AUTHORIZATIONS

rTfE REMOVAL OF THE CORPORATION COUNSEL
THREATENED by THE MAYoR-CoRREsPoNDENC
BETWEEN THEM-ALLEGED ABUSES IN THE EN-
PLoYMENT OF REFEREES.
Mayor Wickham has ordered the Corporation
Counsel, L. Dela1ed smith. 10 show cause why he
should be removed. The Mayor, In the OF
long letter to the Corporation Counsel, says
Opinions pronounced IN the Court OF Appeals, on Civ
ing two judgments Of that tribunal against the ate in
favor OF James w. IngersOl and Thomas c. Folds, are
supposed have substantially established that frauds
tue City Treasury upon funds here produced by
local taxation are irremedable by judicial proceed
ing whatever unless 1t De by actions brought in tho
name OF " The MaVOr, Aldermen, and COmmOnalty OF
the City of NewYork" Even though the local officers
fer tnstance. the Mayor, the Aldermen, and the
CITY Corporation COunse-5houd, from parallty, cor
ruptOn or other vicious motive collide with fraud
ulen claimants against the local public in depredating
upon the local treasury such, says that Court Is
the present state OF our law bearing ON this subject that
there can he no remedy except as before tatedtat
asmt 10 De conducted ny one portion OF the consprng
swlnders against themselves their conedertes. Tue
opinion IN InSersos intimaes a decided leaning
toward TINS conclusion; Outi there beng possible
DOUBT whether IL absolutely necessary to decide the
pout at that time positive decision concerning was
Then Temporarily withheld Feidss case which was
considered aiterward presented the point directly
and an opinion was then pronounced. meeting 1t with
over tie interests OF the local taxpayers to such
agency Of the CITY Law Department, over which You
preside head Seeing that against the wrongs perDc
trated upon the people OF tins taxpaying district
they are tnus uehleu any reieI save through sa'tS
brought by their corporate officers it has become
TO taRe care t1at this single available remedy he not
rendered vain and illusOry
Information that there existed practice OF submitting
claims against the cliy 10 referees "nch cOud hdrdy
meet the approval Of discriminating observer, the
minated 10 you during ms ocal term tnt yOHr seec
ton Of or acqaescence III this method " trial might b.
come sui ject OF criticism. Contrary u the views
which he mus expressed, and Notwithstanding his re-
mOnstrances, which on one notable occasion were i'm
still prevails Aside from the cys claims, amounting
TO more than &0000.0O0 growing OF the notorious
frauds perpertted by Tweed aud his associates there
are, or very lately were, pending IN your department.
or In us charge and under It's obs rvatOn claims IN sui
against the city amounting TO AT least s7G0O,OOo
The Mayor then proceeds 10 frame indictment Of
three counts against the Corporation COnuscl.
Tue Mayor first refers To the suit brought by John
Baird for s7OO0O0 alleged to be due on contract for
supplies ldo through the agency OF Tweed on Aug D.
1871 The cOntracJ for lO.O00 water meters which
nave never been OF any use 10 ne city u was procured
from Tweed, through tho aid of Al xander Irtar,
to whom s2O@O was advanced without security.
TINS case Was referred, ana thus an opportunity
OF reviewing in appellate Court tue denial OF jury
t1iaI 10 inc CITY mas prooaDy Dee1 ios', luo Dl'.or
holds that an alteration oI rdud III oD'ahl1g the
contract the cy's sole reliance, ana that such
case should never have been referred.
Your appointment 70 ONCE 50 AMY traceahie 10 the
agency these men. kept them mean while tue
der your predrcessOri ahu as we nave seen Opportu
NIFTY seized IN this very interim To Obviate by special
Legislation the possibility that any other CITY Gineer
should again Interfere TO protect the Guys rights III d
fault OF proper acton by the Law Delar ment
The claims against Tweed and his associates,
involving many millions OF dollars, are now Nv
these decisions of tie highest Court placed ex
cluslyely IN charge OF your Department. ana we
havo .reached the fourth year since the last OF
the frauus committed. No gentleman standing In
your relation TO Tweed and his associates could prose
cute them with the zeal and active energy needed
compete successfully with the large corps OF eminent
able counseors whom their stolen millions eDable
them 10 employ.
/ hereby assign the hour OF II ut noon
Wednesday next for hearing any objections yOu
may desire to Offer; and unless you snail then
show reasons sufficient IN my Judgment 10
prevent such action, 1 VIII, for the above
forth, yOu from the Office OF Counsel 10 the
CORPORATION Of the City OF New-York ana head of inc
City Law Department. TIE place appointed for the
hearing the Mayors Office IN tie City Hall.
The Corporation Counsel, III reply to The Mayors Let
ter says that he the satisfaction of every
Just mind every fact and every inference IN the cOmmu
nicatOu which calculated TO bring tho admins ration
of the law department under criticism. He says that
he cannot do himself justice in two days, and
asks for hearing week from Wednesday.
MAYOR Wickhan will extend Mr.. Smith all the time
necessary present promptly whatever defense he has
To make TO the charges.