New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1881-08-24


vulgar cutlery OF excited popuace," and again. as
mobs TO take the law into their hands and 10 subs
the slow aud certain process OF judicial proceedng,
which may be permitted 20 remark is a state OF iee
Ing produced by no ordinary condition OF AFFAIRS anu
me pubic may be presu,1fd TO iayG i wv Was o"'
Commissioners OF Police IN respect 10 cleanS
OF Soyrmbnr $50 TO the I'd of March 1881 and that
they and each Of them, the sad stephen B. French J9e
fi,e SS i 9e If their duty Their counsel urge
upon my consideration number oi excuses ior the non
inony Of the Commissioners of them ventuIed
10 come forward as WITNESSES Ia their own behalf
CAPTAIN wIIdIAMs's TESTIMONY.
Captain Alexander Williams, the Inspector of Street
Cleaning upon whom the Commissioners impose
the burden of responsibility, produced by them
Witness and testified at great length. His testimony
coneusiyely establishes the that In all the streets
with the exception OF few which he mentions the dirt
and filth that covered them in March the accumula
hon from November down to the time he began the
spring cleaning ~ don't recollect." says he, "doing
any cleaning after the first in November; is
any sweeping, athoughlt is not proven that. partcu
larry during the early part of the winter, cleaning was
SHOWS that nahS OF inc stteets nad art III them
when the first storm came in November. Green
sure" says he Washington-st aud Greenwich st. cot
cleaned only ON sundays hecausc ut t,e iInnense az
ell" streets that horoug hfares il appears did
not get cleaned otener than once in two weeks. per
funds of the Bureau in October last, he said Last
ton for street cleaning and we made up the deficiency
IN june July ana August" SO that the Bureau seems
October, November and December Captain Williams
1851 so very large although he admits that it
was the accumulation from the 10th OF November"
Ihat the Bureau had money in December, January and
T fO9 hsd n0 been been %sSG f taking
reasons ana that out OF the January and February
He saws that the lee in the river and SdS S IN weatr
|
throughout the winter; that is with what he calls The
sweeping proper -; nor had the piling OF snow in the
streets by tue railway companies the sprnklng of
xtiCr6ey and Police justices failed to do their duty
More money and carts he says would have made the
cleaner, unless the frozen STUFF had been picked up
which would have cost good deal of money But here
again he admits that they did deem 1t expedent
spend their money in that and reserved for other
sire and intention of making good possible
Tor himself aud his superior officers.
THE APPROPRIATION SUFFICIENT.
The amount appropriated by the Board of Estimate
and AppOronment for the year 1881 $735 900, of
which $4,000 for account of snow and ice and
100000 for account of plant In addition to this
fer made by the Board of Estimate aud Apportion-
me- which increased the appropriation for snow and
Ice $4,000 Further the Bureau had the advantage
$4,000 of new plant purchased 1880 am satisfied
from the evidence that the Commissioners of Police
with the means at their command could have cleaned
the streets and removed the ashes and garbage very
dirt and ashes WeFe allowed TO- aecnmnate e' in me e
streets during the entire winter with the intention
the part of the Commissioners, if their witnesses,
the CHIEF Clerk of the Department Mr. Hawley.
understood speaking for them cleaning up some
time in the spring. for which purpose they reserved
balance OF their appropriations Any such policy |
leve TO he in direct violation of the law And here it
remeln bered that the Commissioners had been
IN the habit upon occasions OF overseppng the limits
OF their monthly appropriation and spending money
ing to the exigencies of the case If they we're
Justified during this winter when the diioues of the
work Were so much greater than usual to sanction the
ms rfnrIp
anee IL is thus apparent that the want of money
not the real reason Tor the nOnperfOrmance of the work
ASHES AND GARBAGE NOT REMOVED.
Much stress has laid by counsel upon the unusual
severity of the winter, and yet the for the
Commissioners swear that the winter severe
but that the employees of the Bureau did their whole
duty in removing the ashes and garbage The great
majority of the ashmen, several foremen and Cap
tain Williams that the severity of the weather
only mpeded them in the performance of their work.
but did not prevent it being done But the extremely
filthy condition of the III the spring resulted not
much from the failure clean the streets as from the
failure to remove the ashes and garbage, removal
by most Of the witnesses for the comnson ws 5 waa
actually accomplished AS it is, l am compelled
bage were not properly removed. II the witnesses
for the Commissioners are TO be believed very little time
was lost by the employees in the because of the
severity of the weather and the ashes garbage were
and cost This is simple question Of veraoity hav
ing listened long and patiently to these Witnesses have
not oeeh Impressed generally with their truthfuncss,
either from the manner in which they testified the cir
here employees testifyng for employers
their interest To admit that they failed in their
dismissal; and am obliged to say, that in large
Der of eases the aacrty of the witnesses was very
intelligent and in Others IL not altogether
deceptive hal conception of the sanctty oath
VIOLATIONS OF CORPORATION ORDINANCES.
80, If the witnesses for the Commissioners are to be
believed, the much-eomplaned-of Instructions in the
streets ultimate inpedment the satisfactory
performance of the work. Much the thing may be
said with regard the alleged the Police JUS
tees to properly punish violations the corporation
and sanitary ordinances cannot the evidence
OF the policemen called has to my mind established any
such failure but that 1t has rather tended establish
the direct opposite. If violations of the ordinances
relative to throwing prohibited into the streets
one- frequent universal throug bout GER
tain districts the Commissioners would have me he
heye then the evidence of their officers establishes
either their their utter neglect Of
duty, for with most of them the day when they made
such arTcSts-and there few such days-seems TO
the alleged failure of duty part OF the Corpora
ton Attorney and the Objectionable practices of the
railway companies again k unfortunate for he
commissioners that their agents swear that as
matter of fact these things did prevent them from
doing their duty and their whole duty. While am not
tndt they dld their duty, neither
at ther failure so TO do s proved by the evidence
the result of the causes alleged.
Much testimony IA second third and
fourth charges and athough discoses state of affairs
not altogether credabe to the Commissioners and not
upon the government of the Bureau nevertheless dis
miss that part OF the evidence from all consideration
Rroven 10 amount TO cause for the removal the
commissioners. - '
SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR REMOVAL.
The only question which remains Is to determine
whether the first charge and two under
Il being proven, which find them to be- this amounts TO
for the removal from Office the Commissioners
against whom the charge is preferred They failed in
the great trust nperatiyely imposed upon them by the