Los Angeles daily herald., 1888-08-22
The Proposed CITY Charter.

Cnartor 10 De SuDmlLteu Dy Cno bO8rQ OF
Freeholders to the city. The Board has
now almost finished its labors, and the
Charter will receive its final touches in a
few days and be made complete instru-
ment. The document as whole is such
as should satisfy the average judgment.
1t is true that no one individual will be
satisfied with every part OF it; but the
measure of merit to an instrument Of
this kind is to be considered with rela-
ton to its most important provisions. If
these are, on the whole, wise and judi
cious-if there be no radical error OF
principle or general error of policy char
acterizing them, and ii the tendency of
the instrument in all its articles is to
meet the wants Of the COM
munity in their fundamental
legislation, then fair judgment would
decide in its favor. There is less fear
to the public interests from proper power
literally granted than there is from a
parsimonious retention from the political
corporation of power that may be occa-
sionally and at rare exigencies required.
1t is not in the excess of authority
granted to a corporate body
of municipal character that
there is danger, for there are always
powers and influences in Democratic
form of government which can restrain
tyrannical tendencies and prevent pub.
lie bodies from stretching their organic
powers; but there is no way in which
municipality can accomplish objects of
great and pressing corporate need, un-
less the power exists in its charter to
authorize it to carry them out.
Therefore we have positive and effect.
i've check upon the undue exercise of
power whilst We have no authorization
for doing in an emergency that which We
ought to do. Powers granted may be
used, subject to the discretion of the
legislative department. If they are at
tempted to be used in an arbitrary or
unpopular manner, the check of pub
lie opinion will successfully interfere.
But if a great public improvement is to
be made, or other matter of urgent and
unforeseen necessity is to be carried out,
unless there be grant or implied grant
of power to do so in the charter, the city
is helpless. In the instrument under
review, we find that the Freeholders
have made liberal provision to take the
city out of it's infantile garments and
place it in position for a robust and
advancing career.
The charter provides for the division of
the city into nine wards, with the inter-
secting line running through Main street.
Each ward is entitled to one Councilman,
so that we shall have a Council which
will be neither too large or too small. 1t
is fair compromise between the present
fifteen and the five that were proposed
in the rejected charter. The term of the
elective offices is to be two years. The
Mayor, with the confirmation of
the Council will have the appointment
of four members of the Board of Health,
the Directors of the Public Library, four
Police, four Fire and four Park Commits
sioners; Superintendent of Bridges, q
Water Overseer and Sealer of Weights
and Measures. This restricts the patron.
age of the Mayor, perhaps more than we
would like to see it restricted. But where
it takes appointing power from the
Mayor it gives it to Boards of Commits
sioners, and leaves to the people the
selection Of all the important officers
who are to administer their affairs. This
is Democratic-this is right. The great
objection to the lately defeated charter
was that it took too much power from
the people and gave too much
to the Executive. 1t would be
a nice thing to determine exactly
where the line should be drawn;
but we believe we make no mistake
when we say that under our institutions,
if there is to be any moving of the line,
it is towards the people and not from
them. The salaries of the following
officers are fixed in the charter, those
of all others are to be fixed by
the Council: Mayor, $4,000 per annum
each Councilman, $1,000 per annum
City Clerk, $2,4oO; Auditor, $4,000;
Assessor, 50, 400; Treasurer, $2,40O; City