San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1891-07-28
SHORT STOPS.
What the People are Saying.

Alderman Hoefiing took his seat iH
the city council without any unusual
demonstration. When we come to
consider the history of this case it
furnishes q most complete Indictment
against the present city admlnistra-
tion.
The city election was held on the
second Monday in February; Mr..
Hoefiing took his seat on the 9th of
July. The administration made it.
self party to the contest in
every way that was possible
to prevent Mr.. Hoefiing from being
seated; the city attorney became Mr..
Boelhauwe's lawyer; the city refused
to disclose the poll lists, and every
delay of the law was invoked to wear
the contestant out; finally mandate
of the supreme court seating Hoefling
was resisted, and the city attorney,
after playing the role of Boelhauwe's
attorney, furnished an opinion ad-
vising the council to disregard the
mandate of the supreme court; under
this opinion the council acted until
the rising tide of public opinion
threatened a deluge, when they got q
lawyer, not the city attorney, to give
them another opinion to allow them
TO hedge.
The city council is in q miserable
plig hit; the city attorney, upon whose
legal attainments they hung all their
hopes, has been proven to be unreli.
able.
A vote of want of confidence has
been passed, and there remains but
one thing for Mr.. Bergstrom to do
resign.
A large reward would not produce
a lawyer who would back Bergstrom's
opinion. But it is Just such work
that has been going on in our city all
the time under this administration.
A slight review of the instances in
which the public interests have been
sacrificed in obedience to this city at
torney's opinions would startle the
people. One of the most notable Is |
is the opinion surrendering the rights
of the public on Paseo street and
river adjacent.
1t was capable of proof by hundreds
of living citizens that not one foot of
the property grabbed belonged to any
private individual; that it was made |
land in the bed of the river, border |
ing public highway. Yet the city
council surrenders the rights of the |
public upon an opinion of the city at |
torney. 1t may be another case where |
the city attorney is playing the role
Of the attorney for the trespassers and
city attorney. His salary from the |
city is fixed; an additional fee from
the trespassers would be clear gain. |
The question remains unanswered;
does not the city attorney abandon
his office when he leaves the state
without permission from the city
council; this body Is supposed to rep
resent the business firm known as the
incorporation of the city of San An
tonic; an employee should be held to
strict accountability.
The people will try, the next time
they have an opportun ity, to elect q
city council that will obey the man.
dates Of the courts, and not be run
ming after "good lawyers" for opinion.
"Good lawyers" cost money; good
aldermen save money. But who is to
pay the "good lawyers" bill, when
the city attorney proves failure.
Mr.. Hoefiing missed his first oppor-
tunity; he should have insisted on
the city clerk reading, with his usual
emphasis, the sixteen pages of opin-
ion from the "good lawyer" as he did
from the "bad city attorney" es-
pecially if the people must pay for
it.
The suit to test the eligibility of
Indians to naturalization under the
laws of the state of Texas and the U.
8. should be filed as soon as possible.
The people are anxious to have this
matter settled.
A public park is a private snap, &C.
cording to the Callaghan dictionary.
But public park is no more of pri-
waite snap than q public street; 1t is
the property of the people, prospect
i've of race, color or condition. The
custodian of the San Pedro Park will
make a note of this