The Sunday tatler and Jersey City express. (Jersey City, N.J.) 1883-1886, 1885-05-03

designation of the new members of thu
Board of Education r he gasped.
'.Mayor Collins has not yet filed any of
fetal document indicating that he hat
made any appointments. returned The
City Clerk.
Counselor McGills hopes were dashed
There was nothing for him to certiorari
1t is suggested that the Mayor may have
omitted to file the notice in City Clerks
Office in anticipation of a possible certi-
orari, and to defeat interference with the
Board the people have ordered him to
select. He sent personal notices to the
gentlemen he has chosen, and three of
them have qualified. The rest will qualify
tomorrow, and De sworn in. There is
little or no prospect of interference with
them. Corporation Counsel Brinkerhoff
has advised Mr.. O'Sullivan, Secretary of
the old Board, TO surrender the property
of his oficeto the Mayors appointees.
The Board of Aldermen met last evening
to approve the minutes and adjourn sine
die. The new Board will organize to-mor-
row. A caucus of Democratic members
was held last evening. but the result could
not be learned President Furman said to
the TArrLER yesterday that his license
views had been misconstrued in an edlto-
rial article published in these columns last
Sunday. In his communication to the
Board of Aldermen he had merely pre-
sented the views of the people, without
expressing any opinion about their cor
rectness.
In the Board Of Works there is pecul-
lar deadlock over the distribution of the
patronage. The combination of one Dem
oerat with two Republicans against two
Democrats and one Republican indicate
that the division is on the spoils. So far
no agreement seems to have been reached
as to the Presidency. Leake is willing to
be it; so is Carr Of the Fifth district. Pub
lie sentiment is rather with Carr than with
Leake. The removal of Street Commissions
er Nathan was the unexpected f'bomb" the
retiring Board flung into the new. Its
purpose was understood to be the paving
of the way for the appointment of ex-
Commissioner Van Keuren. Mr.. Nathan,
who has made competent and popular
official, insists that he is still the head of
the Street Department. He claims to hold
on by slender technicality. The old
Board failed to meet to approve the 'smin-
utes' of that meeting at which his removal
was ordered, and the meeting is therefore
as though it had never been held-tnat is
understood to be his position. His friends
have drawn equally fine points in his be-
half. There are two lines of arguments to
show that the old Board at the time of the
removal had gone out of office-that their
terms had expired. One goes on the as
sumption that the term OF the old Board
expired at the midnight that opened the
final Monday of their existence. And
then it has been argued that, marking off
their terms of two years from the time of
the expiration of the term of one of their
predecessors, their terms had really ex-
pired on the 23d. These refnements are
of little value to Mr. Nathan unless there
be a tie between him and Van Keuren in
the Board. If either has four votes there,
the question is settled for or against him
without regard to the power of the old
Board to remove.