New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1890-10-27
CRUSHING REPLY TO GRANT.
HIS LETTER OF ACCEPTANCE RIDDLED BY
WHEELER II. PECKHAM.

MENTS-THE MAYORS BROKEN PLED9Ea
THE WHOLE CITY GOVERNMENT
LOOKS AS IT DID BEFORE
THE TWEED EXPOSURES.
Wheeler H. Peckham, chairman Of the People's
municipal League, answered In . letter Given
out last night, for the League, Mayor Grants
etter accepting denomination. Mr.. Peckham
addresses the Mayor in person, and he first tells
MIN that in the preparation of his letter Of accent
ance Those upon whom he relied for information
ABOUT current political events and about what
mas oeen done by the city government In tha
Ias1 1wo years must have deceived him grossly.
an no o1her way can his errors and misleading
oe accounted for. The people, Mr.. Peckhsm
iniofms the Mayor. have not forgotten the prom
1ses and pledges which were made two years
ago, and they gaze with disgust at the dirty
streets, overcrowded schools and indicted Exoise
Commissioners The writer refers to the Mavors
message Of last January, and quotes from IL Mr..
Grants declaration that there was In a majority
OF the city departments . gratifying evidence Of
determination to secure retrenohment IN ex
penditures, at the same time maintaining hiah
standard OF efficiency. That statement Mr.. Peck
ham declares it to be gltttering generality"
In answer to the Mayors declaration that the
opPoSitioh hsS not, eltner In platform or pam
phlet, expressed any views for the Improvement
of the city government, the writer says, that the
opposition entertained tie view that the CITY
debt In place Of. increasing $s,nG0,O0O annually.
should be decreased by that amount The oppo.
sition further compares the payrolls Of this city.
$l2,000000 annually, while the total annual OK
penses of Philadelphia less than that sum, and
Of Brooklyn, $6,5oO,OOO. n
The street-cleaning portion OF the Mayors letter
is next taken up, and the Mayor is asked to
recollect his statements Of last year, when the
Street, Cleaning Commissioner was not . Tam
many Hall man. The opposition says Mr..
Peckham. holds that the streets could be
kept clean for the money now spent in keeping
them dirty"
Mr. Peckham next takes up the Excise Board.
The opposition" he adds, considers that the board
all the members Of which were appointed by
Mayor Grant, is organized as badly as possible
it's members incompetent, and the administration
disgraceful, and the $4,000 spent annudlly in
pretended verfcation of licenses is waited on per-
functory services. References is also made 10 tho
fact that the Grand Jury agrees with this presenta
ton Of the case.
Next comes the Registers Office, and figures arc
quoted showing the expenses and receipts Of tho
office in 1886, when it was o fee Office, and last
year when 1T was a salaried office. Under the
old system in 1886 the receipts were $20l, 900,
the expenses S110,000 the profit to the Register
$4,000. Under the Tammany control the ex-
penses for last year were $145,00O, the receipts
$4,000, and the loss to the city $4,000.
Reference is made also to the 10000 children
who are unable to attend school, because there
are no accommodations for them. and the Mayors
previous promises in this respect and his vacil.
lating course on the appropriation of money for the
siderable attention.
Mr.. Grants record as Sheriff follows, and he n
asked if his warmest friend can speak of it with
out blush. He is also asked to point to single
thing which he did to reform the office, and II hs
did not receive one-half of the auctioneers fees.
I'm every one of the city departments into
which investigations have been made the result
has been disgraceful to the officers and humiliat-
ing to the citizens Of this city," continues Mr..
khan The Mayor Is pontedly asked II hs
thinks that the people who desire improvement In
the city government would stultify themselves
by voting for him..
THE MAYOR CRUELTY DECEIVED.
The letter to the Mayor continues as follows:
few Of the where the person on whom You relied
IN the preparation OF your letter has most cruelty
frcnt that in twenty years only forty six piers were
built by the city, The truth is that over seventy
You say, The pier line has been extended
and twenty two piers have been enlarged, making an
aent TO sixtysIx city lots These improvements have
induced many transportation interests to return to tho
PEELED to discharge their cargoe in other Cities because
more OF our wharves were able to afford accommo-
ey have pobe tho SsnaSg o
Thousands OF tons OF additional freight
Of ss By e hs so.s Si o pe Docs:
and bill for that purpose was prepared before the
Mr. Reekman then Corporation Counsel. who was ap.
pointed by your prsde;essor 1t WAS this bin with
DO honestly sslnE that your sd%!nistfaaon III !:
What however, can be meant BY the statement
that all theso improvements have been prosecuted
without any IN The e cost %a Of
ministratIoni If not. why refer to themi you DO Do
know IS wen the Opposition. that such improve:
ans, 40 9 not ns d the hS 1os Of
SsSt was nsressed % this manner ssG IN 1887 a.
ANOTHER OLD TRICK EXPOSED.
As was to be expected, the most surprising part Of
your letter is that In which you treat Of financial
questions. You mention "the policy Of lowering tho
tax rae.' What meaning. unless deception. has such
policy1 There Is only policy about city taxes
and that to reduce the tax levyto reduce the taxes
To reduce the rate and Increase the valuation and
tax levy In old trick 1t is trick familiar in the
days known Bsss Tweeds." low tax rate does
not smaller tax levy, nor docs high tax rate
necessarily mean large expenditures Ten years ~
in $780, the expenses so 900 900; the tax rate
then was 2.53. In 1880 the tax rate was l.96 but
the expenses were a35, 900 900. Tho valuation of
property has been increased sufficiently In the last ten
years to allow this increase OF S8oO0,0Oo In ex-
penses and at the time to permit reduction In
the tax Of moro than 30 per cent 1t Is disin-
genuous and misleading say, you did In your mos
sage TO the Common Council that II Is an especial
source OF rongratustion that the taxpayers have NOT
becn compelled to bear an additional BURDEN Tho
tax bills nave been larger, though the rste may
be lower.
In the valuation OF property the statement that the
,nSb "A h~au