The Jersey City news. (Jersey City [N.J.]) 1889-1906, 1894-02-14

this Board on the 18th day OF January, 1894,
at 4 80 o'clock P. NJ, was presented by the
Clerk of this Board.
(Thc possession Of this veto was announced
by the said Clerk to the Board while in ses-
sion during its last meeting. held January 80,
1894, and the same was not entertained by
the Board at said meeting, and the Clerk di-
rected by the President to withhold the pres
e~ntation of the same until the next regular
meeting, which is this meeting }
Mayors Office, City Hall,
JANUARY II, 1894.
Honorable Board of Finance:
Sirs-I herewith return without my APP
proval the two resolutions passed by your
Board on December 81, 1893, one appointing
Brinkerhoff as Corporation Counsel
of this city and the other appointing James
S. Erwin as Corporation Attorney. These
resolutions were forwarded to me by our
Clerk upon my peremptory written demand
for them, which / made in pursuance to my
right to consider all matters N acts of your
Board, as provided in Section 10 of the new
of 1889.
Under the provisions of the new Charter of
1889 the appointment OF the law officers OF
the CITY, as well as the members OF your
Board, was vested in the Mayor absolutely,
without confirmation; by Chapter 121 of the
Laws of 1898 (page224) a partisan legislature,
over the veto of the Governor, attempted to
vest the appointment by section one of the
law officers of the city in your Board under
certain restrictions and to require by section
two the confirmation OF other officers On
GLIDING the members of your Board by a
two-third yote.o the then Board of Finance.
In April last, upon the expiration of the
terms of Messrs. Edelstein and Peterson then
members of the Board of Finance, / decided
after consultation with and advice from
counsel well yersed in municipal and consti-
tutional questions to ignore the provisions OF
that act of 1898 as unconstitutional, and l
appointed as members of your Board Messrs.
Fraser and Detwiller. These appointees
were admitted to the Board; their predeces-
sors instituted suits in the Supreme Court to
contest the validity of their several appoint
ments, but no decision has yet been reached.
Pending that decision you have taken the ill
ogical course of treating the act of 1898 as
valid SO far as appointment oy you IS con-
cerned, but void as to your own appoint
mepts. The objections which have been
raised to the second section of that act, con-
corning the confirmation of certain officers
by the Board of Finance, apply with greater
force to the provisions of the first section
concerning the election of the law officers;
the section is special legislation, because it
requires a law officer in Jersey City and
Newark to be elected by a two-thirds vote of
q ", 1AlkO IL uhC u~A6hN
may be elected by a two-thirds vote OF a
Board, while in the balance of the State he
may be elected by a majority vote; there is,
moreover, a great difference between the
Common Council of the city of Newark, with
its elected membership, and the appointed
Board of Finance of Jersey City, which
must stand under the present law, composed
of three members of n political party and
two of the other. The mere statement OF the
latter fact shows that it was intended to pre-
vent a change of the present incumbentse x-
cept bv deal and decker Until the Supreme
Court shall have settled the question / have
not deemed it wise to disturb the terms OF
either of the financial officers, the Comptrol-
Ter or Treasurer or of the two law officers.
Again, l consider the method OF the APP
pointment as unworthy Of the leading Board
of an important city, a Board which should
be above petty intrigue an u-nannounced
changes. When elected Mayor of this city |
found William D. Edwards as Corporation
Counsel, with one year of his second term
still to be served; among a multitude OF
Democratic officials he was the only one who
offered to resign and permit me to appoint
his successor; since the expiration OF his term
in April last he has always expressed his
willingness to be relieved OF his duties as a
city officer. During his term of office the
law business in the city in all its departments
has constantly been increasing until it has
absorbed the greater part OF his time. have
found him an energetic, resourceful and UNI
firing officer; his wide acquaintance with
the various departments of the city govern
ment, down to the smallest details, has been
of" invaluable service to me and to your Board
on MANY occasions. The winning by the
city under his guidance of the South Cove
case, as well as many other railroad cases,
is a sufficient answer to the inuendoes COM
ing from certain members of you Board, as
reported in the public press. The railroad
officials are his most constant critics.
Mr.. Edwards term expired in April, 1898;
since that time he has held over without APP
pointment, and without desire for appoint
ment, and even with the knowledge OF whom
I desire to appoint as his successor, which
knowledge was likewise familiar to your
Board. Uuder these peculiar circumstances
Mr.. Edwards has continued in the discharge
of the important duties of his office without
abatement, but expecting his release at any
time upon reasonable notice in order to en-
able him to close up the more pressing affairs
of the office. 1t is to me a pleasure that at
the meeting of your Board at which the res
olutions in question were passed, when asked
by one Of you memcers regarding the UNI
finished business in his hands, he was able
to SO reply that your action towards him
seems the more unjustifable. This is the
more gratifying to me because it has been
my rule to permit no city officer to be neg
lectful of the work of the city, where the
same comes under my direct observation.
These facts enable me to state that if Mr..
Edwards permitted himself to occupy the
position he has for the past nine months,
simply because the proper time had not
come for the appointment of his successor,
then he had a right to expect as decent treat
ment from you as regards his displacement
as he had shown to the city, and [ may add
at all hours and places to your Board during
that long period.
These last remarks apply equally to the
case of Mr.. Weart, whose term likewise ex-
pired in April last. Let me relate the IA
miliar circumstances of his appointment to
the Corporation Attorneyship. As you well
know, when / was elected Mayor in 1892, it
was deemed advisable that | should appoint,
for a time at least, as my private secretary
a lawyer familiar with the city government
and capable of Sitting the vast amount of
detail work which daily came into this office.
My training up to that time had not quail
fed me to deal with these matters unaided.
The choice fell upon Mr.. Weart. He finally
accepted, and for more than ten months de
voted himself unremittingly tc the task be-
fore him. To a large degree he was called
upon to advise me upon the m~uit1tudinou
legal questions daily arising. In this way he
became practically, if not nominally. one of
the law officers of the city. The present con-
dition of the routine business of the city is
largely due to his efforts during that period,
the knowledge which / then acquired and the
systematic methods of work then insisted
upon. When Mr.. Hudspeth was elevated to
tie judgeship in January, 1893, there was
left of his term as Corporation Attorney
about two months. 1t was deemed certain
that the Legislature, then in session, would
take the power of appointment from me, as
they afterwards attempted. OF course | at
once offered the position verbally to Mr..