The New York herald., 1879-03-21
The Mayor and the Police Commis-
sioners-The Common Sense of IL.

/ tod, mas ADVISED the Mayor Omclally tnnt
'there is no provision Of law for anything
in the nature of trial in the case OF the
contemplated removal Of head Of de-
partment !" and that the Safeguard against
an abuse Of power" which is ordinarily
found in trial, is provided in another way
ion is dated on the 18th and the Mayor
acted on the 10th it is permissible to infer
that His Honor called for this official advice
in order to make it the basis of his action
with the Commissioners of Police, as in fact
he did act upon the principles therein de-
clared in refusing to permit nm ordinary
act OF ministerial duty to become judicial
process.
Should the view of the law taken by the
Corporation Counsel not be sustained by
the Supreme Court, what then? Possibly
it may not be sustained by that Bench, for
the Supreme Court not only differs with very
capable lawyers, but sometimes differs with
itself, and in its turn the Court of Appeals
differs with the Supreme Court; SO that
il we are once fairly launched upon doubt
as to legal point certainty is the one
thing that is absolutely not obtained short
of the court of last resort. Is it obtained
even then2 Not on point of abstract
right, for the same point may come up in
different shape in another year with other
judges in the Court of Appeals, and then
we may have it decided another way.
Therefore the judges may differ with the
Mayors adviser, and if they do the fact that
he advised the Mayor officially will make no
difference as to the error.
Aside from the legal niceties, however,
and in any common sense judgment on the
merits Of this transaction. the attitude of
the Commissioners is ruinous to their own
case. Every public functiopary who OBJ
structs a properly authorized inquiry into
the way in which he has performed his
duties condemns himself in the eyes Of the
public. Plain people know that an honest
cashier is not only ready to show his ac-
counts, but glad OF the chance to get some
one to show them to. Had General Smith
as o brigadier in command in his periods
OF military service failed to carry q
position he was ordered to storm,
and it had been whispered about that
the failure was due to very unpleasant
delinquencies of duty on his part, would
he not have been the first to demand an off,
cial inquiry? Undoubtedly he would, and
the proud eagerness 6f soldier to clear his
case before his fellow soldiers, the readiness
of an honest cashier in his invitation of
scrutiny, are acts in accordance with or
dinary human impulses, and they commend
themselves to every mans own conscious
ness of what is right. But, on the con-
trary, case is prejudiced in every ones
view when the official called upon to give
IN account of his stewardship appeals to
lawyer to help him out with technical de-
| fence.
Il Is nrrant nonsense to say that any
lawyer was necessary in this case, except in
| SO far as it was desired by somebody to
have lawyers aid in perplexing o plain
matter, or that there were any legal tech
nlcalities from which the Commissioners
needed protection. They were to answer
the Mayor ON points as obvious as Trinity
steeple, and the answer should have been
as plain as the point inquired about. It
all, it should not have been evasive- It
should not have been o rigmarole of legal
pretexts and 'prevarications. Fancy q man
who dips into Blackstone for an answer when
he isasked ifthe dirt in Greenwich street has
been shovelled out this year or who ap-
peals TO 'sKent's Commentaries" against an
urgent request for information as to why
the Metropolitan ash barrel decorat ed every
wintry thoroughfare for g month ut o time /;
or who would refer you to the Pandects if
osked why such bravo in uniform as Cap
tain Williams has not been disciplined by
his superiors Any such a defence is in
itself o confession.
Every one of tho Commissioners cited be-
fore the Mayor has daily and hourly famil-
iarity with oil the facts involved in the in
quiry to which he was called, or he is not fit
for his Office. They were notified Of alleged
failures to perform their duty. and further
that, on account Of those failures, they
would bo removed from Office unless on a
certain day they could show to the Mayor
TINT they were not properly responsible
Those failures related to tho condition of
the streets and to the decentralization Of the
force, and every fact in either con-
| nection should be as familiar to
them all as his daily concerns are
to any merchant. They were not
called to festival of legal entanglements.
but to an inquiry on the acts of their daily
duty. They knew oil about these or they
did not II they did not know they should
assuredly be removed for simple want OF
attention to their duties. But they proba-
| bly, did know; and why, then, should they
not answer, plainly and strnightforwardly 2
Why should they obstruct on inquiry which
the Mayor is forced to make by the pressure
of public opinion? There can bo no possi-