The New York herald., 1879-03-20

with the case AT all events, nothing dehnie had as
| yet been determined on.
MR.. BAnrIErr's OPINION
''what do you think Of Mayor Cooper's refusal to
hear You behalf of General SMITH" Mr.. Bartlett
II think it was wholly unjustifiable ana at variance
with every principle of enlightened administration
"Do you regard General Smiths statement as
complete answer to the Mayors letter of the l4th
inst. *
"Iregard the answer one upon which the Mayor
with proper sense of his duty would have dismissed
"Do You understand that there is any doubt as to
the Mayors power to remove in the case of Mr..
81 understand that there is an assertion on the
part of the Mayor or his friends that power exists
to nominate successor to Mr.. Erhardt without the
confirmation of the Board of Aldermen"
"Is that based on the law of 1882"
II do not know what law it is based upon and
think the Mayor would find it very difficult to point
it out The whole proceeding conducted by the
Mayor was characteristic of monarchcal govern
ment and indicative of intention in advance to
judged is evident from the statement in the letter OF
the Mayor that the alleged causes warranted the re-
moval."
do I understand that tho Mayor has given you
twentyfour hours to put in an additional answer
"The Mayor made u remark which he addressed to
the gentlemen present to that effect. Upon my ask
ing him whether that remark was addressed to me
did not address us but that the remark was made TO
General smith. General Smith had in fact pre-
viously lett the room, after having been told by the
Mayor that his closed
"Do You propose TO submit anything more in
General Smith behalf in writng?"
II cannot say at the present moment what action
may take tomorrow"
'Have you known executive officer under
similar circumstances to order policeman to eject
counse?"
81 never have, and venture to say such
! never occurred in this government before"
"What do you think about the Mayors course?'
"It was undgnified and grossly improper. as well
as illegal. He proceeded in manner which shows
that he utterly unmndful of courtesy right.
My answer on behalf Of Police Commissioner Smith
specific as the general character of the Mayors
allegations would admit.
Mr. Aaron j. vanderpoel in answer to question as
to the probable future course of counsel, said ~
have nothing which, desire to say now. think it
would be indicate for to express my opinion
II believe the reporter remarked. "that the
Mayor has givea you twenty-four hours more in
'The Mayor" replied Mr. vanderpoel. 'said he
would grant twenty-four hours more in which to put
| in any answer in writing We desired to make.
made reply and then left the room for the Special
Term where had an engagement"
Is Mayor Cooper's power to remove in the Of
| Mr.. Erhardt questioned?' was asked
| 'such claim was made, believe. based on the
ject and have opinion to express in reference to it,
ELIHU ROOT ON THE SITUATION.
Mr.. Elihu Root counsel for Commissioner Err
hardt. was visited at his Office on Broadway. during
the afternoon. Mr.. Root hestated about giving any
| opinion as to what might be done in the present
emergency.
.You seem to think" said the reporter. "that the
| twenty-four hours granted by the Mayor to the
Commissioners for further pleading presentation
! Of views will not alter the situation?'
1.-The communication sent by the Mayor to the
| Commissioners" said Mr.. Root. ''gave informa-
ton whatever as to the causes for which the Mayor
proposed to remove them. In Mr. Erhardt's case.
for instance. the Mayor says the Board has failed In
the general performance OF duties. He does not say
that Mr.. Erhardt has failed to do what he ought
has done anything he ought not except by the general
allowed personal dssensions to preclude the proper
exercise of your trust Your conduct has been un-
against him He is not the Board has only one vote
| in the Board, and no failure. to perform
his duties as member of the Board
4 what information do these charges give? Mr..
Erhardt asks the Mayor to specify what he neglected
The Mayor refused. He asked the Mayor to tell him
in what respect he charged that his conduct had been
| unbecoming his office. Tho Mayor refused. Then
Mr.. Erhardt denied the charges, and asked for the
| Now this is not such o statement of cause for re-
movnl or opportunity to be heard thereon as
| the law requires or the plaiuest dictates of
| Justice demand. A removal in this way would be
| removal at the arbitrary will Of the Mayor The
| department in the city without any regard to his
guilt or innocence. and the Mayor copd bc removed
| BY the Governor in the same manner without tho
| slightest opportunity for defence
II cannot say at present"
Under the circumstances, them there ts little use
| in arguing with the Mayor on the pointT
"T think so. The Mayor seems to have decided the
in advance aud states his decision in his notice
| to the Commissioners. He declined to hear counsel
| upon the most important questions which arose in
as to the "n for their and
furnishing them with the proofs they were to meet
There seems to be nothing left to argne except that
.'wcrc not the Commissioners entitled to be heard
| by counsel?
have been violation of of the clcarest constitu
: tional rights OF every citizen Take, for instance.
the of General Smith. He submitted his ,onse
to the Mayors communication in writing The Mayor
declined to hear counsel on the effect of 1t or re
gsrding it, but ovcrruled 1t without moments con-
sideraon and then proceeded to insist upon General
| smith entering into coloquy with him on the sub
ject and answering number of questions not con.
tanned in the original charges, which the General
| n procedure adopted in the French courts, where
the unfortunate accused Is subjected TO an
| any parallel to it in any English or American
| tribunal To be called before The Mayor on one
| paper containing charges and compelled to answer
orally lot of other papers from which the Mayor
| ready without having ever seen or heard them TO
be declared guilty in advance, without being told of
| what and required to prove ones innocence with
| out showing what evidence is to be met or what IL
tends to show seems to mo not quite IN aceorasnoe
| to receive; and this is what it seems to me the
Mayors proceeding against the Police Commissioners
amounts to-.
VERY RRTrcEST.
President Smith said last evening to reporter
that he much preferred to have nothing to say in
regard to the proceedings in the Mayors Office
'.If volumes were said he remarked in his pecu-
liar. delberative way. they could not make tho
Mayors meaning any palmer than it was shown by
the seancc to-day. But l am in the hands OF my
lawyer, and In any would not care to say any
thlng
Have you any idea why tho Mayor refused to
hear you through counsel ~ asked the reporter.
IL haven't the slightest. said General Smith Nor
have the slightest idea why Mr. Erhardt was called
on before was Nor have the slightest idea why
the Corporation Counsel was there to assist tho
Mayor while 1. who am untitled by years spent in
another and very different profession. was to be
entrappcd by all sorts of means into"-herc he
paused for moment. II to select the right express
sion. and then concluded his sentencc-"making
mistakes"
what do you think Of the whole psoceeding?'
II really can't say anything about 1t. Ieni In the
hands of my lawyers.
Mr.. Erardt refused to say anything at all in rca-
ton to the matter, as did also Mr.. Nichols.