National Republican., 1883-03-30
The Legal Status OF the District Commis-
sioncrs.

To The Editor.
The differences which, according to the
newspapers, exist between the commissioners
of tho district, and which have led to the
resignation of the presidency of the board by
Gen. West, are deeply to be regretted by all
of our citizens who are interested in good
government. If the statements referred to
are to be relied upon, these differences grow
out of the assumption of Gen. West that, as
president of the board, he is entitled to exer-
else certain powers and to control certain
branches of the service, independent of, and
without consultation with, his associates in
the board, and this claim il appears is resisted
by the other members of the board. The
powers conferred upon the commissioners are
defined by the act entitled "An act providing
permanent form of government for the Dis
trict of Columbia" approved June IL, 1873,
and none of them have any power outside OF
this statute Without taking either side in
the controversy, then, it may be well to eX-
anime this act, and determine from its pro-
visions its object and purpose and the power
whether joint or several, conferred upon the
commissioners. The act is clearly drawn, and
there seems to be no difficulty in understand
ing its provisions.
The second section provides that Zone of
said three commissioners shall be chosen
president of the board at their first meeting,
and annually and when u vacancy shall occur
thereafter" This is the only place in the act
where the term president is used, and in no
part of the law are the duties of that office de-
lined. In other words, the act, while provid-
ing for the Office Of president of the board
confcrs no duties or powers upon that officer
other than he possesses rs one of the commits
sioners. As the word indicates, the only duty
of the president would seem to be to preside
ut the meetings of the board, and exercise
these functions which pertain to n presiding
officer This Ia tlp most aud all that bn
claimed for that officer, and the assumption
that as president he should have control of the
police, or any other particular branch of the
public service has no warrant in the statute.
Indeed the statute ignores entirely the idea
of the one man power, and seems to contem-
plate that the acts to be done and performed
shall be the joint act of the board. The
statue in almost every section speaks of the
commissioners" and confers the power to act
upon them jointly, and whatever they do is
the act of all, for which all are responsible.
A reference to every section of the act by
which power is conferred will establish the
truth of this proposition; and it follows from
this that the president is mere fgurehead,
possessing no power beyond that of his coll
leagues. We doubt whether an order made
by single commissioner would be valid for
any purpose, or bind the district or the gov
ernment of the United States, if the commits
sioners have power to make contracts that
would bind the latter, which it is not neces-
sary now to determine. The act contemplates
that the board shall act as n unit. This is
apparent not only from the fact that il no
where provides that in case of n difference of
opinion between the commissioners, except in
single case, the majority of the board shall
control, and by the further fact that the fifth
section provides that call contracts for the
construction, Improvement, alteration, or re-
pairs of the Streets highways avenues, al
leys, cutters, sewers and all work of like ma
hp do aV,1
and with the official unanimous consent of the
commissioners, and all contracts shall
be copied in u book kept for that pur-
pose, and be signed by said commission
ers; and no contract involving an expend-
iture of more than 800 shall be valid until
recorded and signed as aforesaid" Again,
the second section of the act provides that
one of the commissioners shall be an officer
of the corps of engineers of the United States
and one would suppose that this officer from
his special training would be given sole charge
Of the public works of the district yet the
law confers no such power upon him, and he
Is as subject to the control of the other COM
lnissioners with respect to those works as
though he were not specially fitted by his edu
cation to perform that duty.
The whole theory of the statute is that the
three commissioners shall act together and
each assume his share Of the responsibility. |
The act of one is the act of all, and il was the
object of tho law in requiring this concert of
action to prevent corruption and secure good
government. Each commissioner is entitled
to participate in every measure adopted and
every order issued, and itmay well be doubted
whether the board possessed any authority
under the law to confer independent power
upon any one of its members. If this is a cor
rect construction of the statute, as we believe
1t is, ii follows that the assumption of any one
of the commissioners that he shall have special
charge of any Of the duties deyolving upon
the board, to the exclusion of the other men, |
bers, is unwarranted and not sanctioned by
the law After the board has agreed upon the
measures to be enforced and issued the neces-
sary orders for that purpose it may possibly
assign to one Of the members the duty of SUI
pervisng the work; but in that case he is but
the agent of the board to carry out its behests
and he possesses no independent power and
any act Of his in excess of the duty imposed
would be invalid. And the refusal of the
board to assign to any member duties that he
specially desired should not afford ground for
dissension. w. p. G.
Protestant Episcopal Centennial,
This year is the one hundredth anniversary
Of the organization of the old diocese of Mary
land ofter tho capurot ion from, III, ,,,rtb.r