The sun., 1894-05-05
VETOED BY THE GOVERNOR.
THE BILL oIvINs AUToURAT TIC PoWEa
TO FUTURE MAJORS.

Gov. Flower Say. that the Bii - Danger.
| Gus In Principle, and lie Quotes rrou th.
| Fnssstt Comntttes'- Report and tror- the
| Report OF the Tiiden MuricipaI Coru,is-
| Sio-, Which IncIudrd Mr.. Godkt. y, q Mr.
| Carter, In Support Of iiIs yisws-shsrs
| IR'. Salary BuI srd Dock BIu sirusd.
ALBANY, May 4.-Gov. Flower ha. xstoed
Assembymsn sheffield bill giving the Mayor
| OF New York city power to remove heads Of
| Departments. In his veto the Governor saysi
" This bill II 80 phort that 1 incorporate its "
provisions In full In this n memorandum OF dis
| approval:
"sEcroN i.-At any time within SIXTY day, after the
commencement Of his term NJ once each Mayor Of the
city Of New York hereafter elected may remove from
Office any head OF department and appoint h, sucees
sor. such successor shall hold office until removed In
accordance herewith until the expiration OF tho
Of Office Of the Mayor who npponted him. and until his
| successor Is appointed aud qusinrd Nothing hsrsin
contane ed shall be construed affecting the power Of
the Mayor to remove any head Of department for
| cause.
| 1T will be observed that II IL rot m amend
| ment OF the charter OF New York. 1t does not
| specify the heads OF departments which are
| affected, but includes them all In It's sweeping
| clause. II does not directly change the term
| OF Office OF any head OF departm ent rs defined
| Dy IhW But lnulreCtly, tnOuRn none the less
| effectively. 1t limits the term OF office OF the
head OF each municipal department to two
years. unless the officer 10 allowed to serve out
his full term by the favor OF the Mayor. AL
| ready there ls q publ dispute as to whether
| tho bill affects elective heads OF depart rtments,
| like the Comptroller. and while It In admitted
by friends Of tho bill that the measure might
appear to bear that construction I am asked
to leave to the courts tho determination Of this
/ IT,, f..s
| troversy as to the meaning OF the bill has al
ready arisen is n sufficient indication OF the
looseness OF It's phraseology and q Justification
| for its disapprovaL
My objection to the bill. however, does not
rest upon the ambiguity Of It's provisions. but
upon the dangerous principles which they em-
| body. They mako the Mayor o! New York an
| autocrat-the heads OF municipal departments
merely his puppets. They destroy the present
wise system OF checks and balances in muni-
cipal administration-a system designed. like
| that OF the State Government. to protect the
people from wholesale abuses by bad officers.
| BY giving to the Mayor as the bill would,
| controlling influence In the Board OF Estimate
| and Apportionment, It would place under his
absolute control the expenditure OF between
thirty and forty millions OF dollars annually-a
! power which. II so disposed. he could
use for the bassst personal or pollti-
cal ends 1t would bring every head
OF department into an active strife
for the spoils OF ofics. for every such
| officer would know that upon tho election
OF his candidate for Mayor would depend his
| own retention in Office The spos' idea 10
| too much a feature OF our municipal politics
| now. but under this proposed law the entire
civil service OF the city would be active par
| tcipants In local campaigns. and reform In
municipal government would receive serious
| setback. It "a no answer to say that undor
| such q law tbs people would be more likely to
| select a capable man for Mayor. The powers
| now conferred upon the Mayor OF New York
are sufficiently broad to incite the lveliest In
| terest among all good citizens in the question
OF who that Mayor should be. and the best citi-
zenship Is that which Ia alive every day in the
year and at every election. and not the kind
which Is bottled up for occasional explosions.
In this opinion as to the danger OF confer
ring such arbitrary powers upon Mayor. I
am sustained by authority which both classes
| OF advocates OF this bill must respect. One
| authority Is the so-called Fassett investigat-
ing committee OF 1890 and 1891. After .
| careful and comprehensive In nvestiRation into
the workings OF the m unicipal Government OF
New York that committee In its report to the
Legislature. made many recommendations.
but none OF these In volved the feature OF this
till. Indeed on this question the committee
| said We do not believe In making the Mayor
an autoerst But even more distinguished
authority Is that Of the famous Tllden Munici-
port is much valued by municipal reioImers.
This Com mission consisted oi James z. Car
YORK; OSWALD O!tsndorisr. and Z, L. dodEin.
6srsuHSsS sdtoF1 1sft. S mstT0I0sn news
! OILERS. In the course Of their able discussion
OF muntcipsl Goyernmsnt these gentlemen
ierrine M give Very extensive powers upon the Mayor:
lit has Of late years trsqusntiy been suggested that
@ 81 M o ;Ss.nI ~. ,s DoSaIi hal a
present ArrsnssmsnI. there :. tueh . diylsion ot
Rci.i. upon whom %SsdanisrsSion is really essrSs.
WI. ss.Gi Ii aelS: ps
90 the control Of the business Of raising and
sHPTogrl.sns MSa.y. @ m /. s srsG;d that under DER 'Isa
Hsyor rssPonsib. for tasteful OF InscIsnt
y sSsasins si Sss mn.
support in Tue ss6iishsd pneips Of popular rspfs-
s:a,a;iE. sovsrnmsRt Ia: iane.,ons OF d..
ots distribution among the various local obiscis aud
Sh 1E.p .soS Ss Sensible So oS
her seavHsoSs % paSs welfare. IsS rsS S:a
S.:s az %. Saaa. Sf @A.sss wSS sOus ss
unIAEs item A. pleasure ,n .c,.n. .ny.,.,, D,,,,.
the oSatfo oi ysst suns Of ncSsyn The city of Ss-
S.a mum oS q. qSs sss .
No such e9htro oy.I To, PICe n.;2gIseS y ioa.sa
msnt Tue disposition OF ,aeh fgnL .oso!ats shsa
qusaty I6o.' vie woud prove ...htq! to the uass
As OF those Who sought Il only To belrAy u,
The AsautnptI0n IhAt with frequent elections the
people would very soon deposs an unworthy ehisf ON
AltogsGlsT ulusOTy The master ~ the
and patronage OF aliion Of po0pls might not sunsr
himIsf be d splAosd This notion that the present.
failure OF municI.A al elections TO unworthy
ohicsrs IL manly AtIribHtabls nAbIlJ TO
the IssP1nSOtlty for maladin nstTAtton to ita
source ls erroneous The real dheulty 10 that ths
N the citiIeuA. however strongly they may be
convinced of the nscessity Of political change are nos
SrssailsG poH,iesi eohSiHaoa. tor the reason tS.s
there IL no sufficient prospect OF Egs eusA
And again, with reference to the Mayor.
this Commission said:
TO bsstow upon him the absolute power OF appoint.
msnt aud removal Of al the principal ehscutiFs ON
esrA ould Ia the great ellies render hiul auto
eTAt RsGpoRnbliiry Tor ma miulsTaIion would. 10
tsIrus bseAsiy fastened upon him. but 90 apply The
remedy % dsporigon ON poNsr At an election could
be = dtncIlt TASK. 10 put INTO the hands OF single
control OF tAenty millions 81 DO lara vita
liberty % 10 keep himself place you'd be suE
cdAL
Il have quoted at length from the report Of
this distinguished commission for the reason