New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1875-05-10
LOCAL MISCELLANY:

THE GOVERNORS POWER OF REMOVAL
SMNENTs or POLITICIANS ON THE DEFEAT OF THE
ABSOLUTE REMOVAL BILL VIEWS OF hAfoh
HUNTER AND PARK COMMISSIONER srRANAhAN
OF BROOKLYN, AND AssEMBLyMAN kENNApAf'
The defeat of the Absolute Removal hill by
the Assembly was u common TOPIC VI o'"N0, s
AMONG thu pol,,icaus on Saturday. Owing TO tho fact
that the Legislature did not adjourn over IRON friday
until Monday there we're very few Senators or Assem-
bicymen in the city. The majority OF the pohu-
sans were somewhat non-committal. Several were
at.popen. and declared that the Governor should
have been vested with the power of removal of the Canal
Commissioners and state Engineer Surveyor In order
That the abuses in the cement OF the canals, which
nave allowed tn such gigantic poirortlos
may be prevented in the future. Many. however were
Inclined 10 think that the passage of the Senate
bill was better than nothing, rs foreshadowmg an iu
provement in the canal policy The solid vote OF the
Republicans against tho Absolute Removal bili ana inc
large number OF Democrats who voted against IT. VIE
also matter OF surprise 10 many.
Mayor Hunter Of Brooklyn, Democrat. stated 70
reporter of TIE TRIBUNE that lie thought there o9t
be an absolute power of removal somewhere. AGoVer-
nor through his election ny the people received mani
testaon of their confidence and therefore he ought to
have power 10 stop any wrong he might No Cover
nor would he likely To abuse such power, for II w0nld
ruin his political prospects The I'M "achnch' poc
source Of income, and il Gov. Tilden or any other
Governor could stop the leaKs nc was III IdNor VI 6lhe
him the power. -, nj,
J. ; T. Stranahan, President OF the Brooklyn Park
Commission, Republican. thought that >" long as the
Canal Commissioners and the otLsr STATE 1ic9s nv M
toned in the Absolute Removal bill we're elected ny the
pcople they should he independent so that weak or
hcl might not be led 10 do mischief through the acIa
ton or influence OF n strong executive lie wo,iu lhe
~ see all the State dsbuIsng officers 2ppohicu ny ,hc
letting him have absolute pow OF ItiloNd
and holding him responsible for Tie conduct of HIS a
pontees Under any circumstances. the Governor ogh'
Ia have power of removal with the consent o thc t
Assemblyman J. f. Kcnnaday. Democrat OF nc ia
Assembly district OF Brooklyn SAID that ne xotcu lor me
Removal bill because the anal department,
being one in which There had been reason 10 suppose
there had been fraud committed he deemed proper To
and not TO wait for The pTOIacted method OF tlal py
HE senate The Governor being the chief officer OF
State. AMI chosen by the people was ordinarily man
who could I've trusted with such power, without any great
probability that he would Use II wronSrully. Onicals,
&c said elected by the people, because OF 'e SUP
posed fitness for official trust; but II they proved nunl
ihe people themselves could not remove tEti'
To put the p power OF ntn'o'% 'nc SHORTEST tn
and most effective WAY OF getting rid Of such on evil
Such law would not be contrary 20 tile spirit OF inc
Constitution. IL such Law were pa-scd anu shodlu ne
found detective, il could ne changed before any serious
harm could result from 1t. lio thought the bill was
affected by the manner IN which II finally came before
the Assembly The original bill provided for removing
AN state officers the amended hill which was de-
ieed referred only the Canal COMMISSIONERS ana me
State Engineer. majority of the Senate and Assembly
with himself were opposed To giving tie Governor power
10 remove all state officers and he Thought mat ILLS oo-
lection lad created prejudice against TIC bill