The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1875-02-19


smith. ana have received from mr.. smith a
PRINTED paper. winch 1 suppose to be hts answer.
l understood from you that some papers IN reply
to certain allegations OF MI. Smith had been sIib-
mitted.
statute tchapter 1886 OF the Laws OF 1879 section
25). 1t Is proper, always prudent and may ol-en be
necessary, hat should inspect all the allegations
OF the partes-the proofs, II any, lakeland
documents which may throw light on The case.
venlence, you Will transmit TO me the papers
alluded TO, and any Others which may have been
In the other case have nothing before
cept the papers me receipt Of which ID herein ac
municsIed to the Commissioners, OF their answer,
II II was In writing, and, II not statement OF
have made, anu any other papers which relate
With much respect. l have the honor to be- very
truly, yours, SAMUEL J. TiLDEN.
THE MAYORS REFUSAL TO FURNISH THE TESTIMONY.
! EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT.. CITY HALL
To Hts Excellency SAMUEL j. T1LDEN, Governor Of
| the State oil New York.
sln1Your letter. dated sth inst. reached me on
Erst@My certificate dated 80 inst. OF removal
s%sa or s ss
ment OF the city OF New York-wth the accom-.
paying communication to you, tn writing, OF my
| reasons for such removal; and OF
Sscond-My certificate. also dated sd inst. Of re.
q Ss as @
Commissioners heretofore constituting the Board
Of Ere e., Of the city o. New YoIk
writing. Of my reasons Tor sucn removals.
Your letter informs me that, as 70 the case first
mentioned, You have q newspaper copy OF the
charges communicated by me to MT smith. and
that GU have received from him printed paper.
to the second case, you have nothing before you,
except the papers received from me. You DO not
inform me OF the contents OF either the newspaper
! which you state to be copy OF the charges com.
muncated by me to MI. smith. or the printed
| paper which you suppose to be his answer; and
OF the propriety OF submission by him to you Of
any answer addressed to me- and while l s.ill
holH hiC mi Ia n m
no observation here.
| Your letter proceeds with request TO me to
been before me in either Of the cases. particularly
specifying copy OF the charges communicated by
Inc to the Fire Commissioners. OF their answer II
II was IN writing, and II not, statement OF that
TACT and OF any verbal answer which they may
| have made. And you mention that that request
is so made because OF the apprehension thar, IN
| performing the duty in the premises imposed upon
and may often be necessary, tnat (you should in.
spsct al the allegations o the partes-the proofs,
4 any. taken-and documents which may iow
l should ieel more hesitation in assuming to
controvert thai suggestion were not quite sure
| that the Apprehension thus expressed Is only
first impression, and not the result OF mature con-
slderatlo n. Of the PROVISIONS OF tue statute pre-.
| those stated In my communications To you OF the
8d inst.
With regard to those cases had reached def
! mite conclusion before receipt oil your letter; and
my course In reference The ofrcers removed by
me IN strict conformity to the practice now
established by precedents in cases where removals
were maze by Mayor Havemeyer or Mayor Vance.
ana were approved or disapproved by the then
Governor. i am informed that the practice was
adopted 5y my predecessors under adyce OF coun-
| alter mature consideration.
Since the receipt OF your letter. and prompted
by respect Tor any suggestions OF yours nave re-
viewed the grounds OF my own opinion and have
awaited myself OF the advice OF several OF the mem
Of tins Pr whose o
OF the Law, you and have heretofore placed re-
lance
by transmission TO you OF the papers now In your
hands have inlhlled my duty in conformity to
AN ADVISED that 1t is not only not your duty to
cal upon me for anything more than wat have
already furnished you, but that, as Governor OF
the State, you have no power to require more
from me as Mayor-no authority to consider any
empted from ahe labor and responsibility OF m
vestigating or deciding the questions OF fact in
uEn So tna NOW No oDga
warded to you by me, and without reference TO
any other communication, to approve or, In your
made by me upon my own official responsibility
Tor the causes ma reasons stated.
This Is said with all proper Difference to your
own conclusions as to the requirements or the
law; and 1t IS stated as the ADVICE OF eminent
duct wnich rs here set forth merely as an expla-
nation OF my own action, and not at all IS any
upon when nave assumed the position occupied
ny me.
But, In this matter. the Mayor is certainly some.
thing more than commissioner to take testimony
4 Tor the consideration OF the Governor. lie is IN
vested with powers and charged with responsible
ties when do not attach to a mere reieree to as
certain and report the facts. with his opinion.
governments OF tine CITY and Is accountable ior
the administration. He has the power of appoint.
ment oil tie heads OF departments and OF many
Olner officers, which in some cases is exercised
with, and in ot1ers without the concurrence of
Keep himself informed OF the doings OF the sew
eral departments OF the local government, and 10
t.nf q n al pc m rcd
and enforced. For that purpose he may call to-
getner Tor consultation and cooperation all heads
Ol departments, and, after ''DearIng" allowed TO
any head OF department or other person holding
onice under the city government BY appointment.
the Mayor may remove ham for q cause OF the
existence and su0iciency OF which the Mayor Is
himself, In the first instance, the judge.
| Tue statute containing those Provisions Is what
is known as the "City Charter" and the section
conierrlng that power Of removal Is In these
Words
.The heads OF all departments, including those
retained as above. and all other persons whose
| appointment Is in this section PROVIDED Tor, may
be removed by the Mayor Tor cause an after OPP
pOrtunty to Ue heard, subject, however, before
sucn removal shall take effect, to the approval OF
the Governor. expressed IN writing. The Mayor
shall, In all cases. communicate TO The Governor,
in writing. MS reasons ior such removal. When
ever removal is 80 effected the Mayor snail upon
the demand oil the officer removed, make, In
writing public statement OF the reasons there
for" (5ection 25, chapter $685. Laws OF 1871
Those provisions are, am told, all new in
the legislation OF this State, and some OF them
anomalous. But n is TO be observed that the re-
mOvai Is TO be made, NOT BY the Governor, but by
the May and That the parto patton OF the former
is not even by concurrence veto OF pro-
ceediDg winch Is their joint act but Is merely by
approval or dsapprovni OF what has already been
done by the latter.
In the cases COM emplated there need he no par
ties before the May or the statute not require
that charges be preferred agaInat person 30 re-
movable by the Mayor, as is by law exacted IN the
case oi removal by the Governor OF an officer
elected by the people. No accuser Is necessary.
The cause OF removal may grow out OF matter
actually known only to the Mayor himself and to
the official concerned. until communication to the
| Governor Of the Mayors reasons I0r the removal
when 1t Is made. And until The Mayors statement
to the Governor o. those reasons for what been
done 1t Is not required thai any part OF the pro-
ceeoings should Ue reduced 10 writing. Verbal
notice may be given OF what Is regarded by the
Mayor personally as an Objection to the 0flicer
to his conduct; and what the officer is thereupOn
entitled TO IS ''hearIng," which, as am advised,
may be merely an explanation or Justification
| Ma nag M uou or IN ftfea