New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-04-02
a SIGNED BILL, BUT NOTA la W
THE GOVERNOR ACCIDENTALLY APP
PROVES A e d MEASURE.
ITS PURPOSE WAS rs ENABLE JACOB WORTH TO
CONTROL. THE BROOKLYN BOARD OF ALDER
MEN-THE VETO OF MAYOR sCHiEREN
MADE IT IMPERATIVE. ANYHOW

CONTROL. THE BROOKLYN BOARD OF ALDER
MEN-rHE VETO OF MAYOR scHiEREN
MADE IT IMPERATIVE. ANYHOW
A CLERKS MISTAKE.
Albany, April THE following was given out at
the Executive Chamber this afternoon;
Assemblyman Wiemans bill relative to the Alder
manic redisrictinS of the city of Brooklyn was
approved by the Governor to-day under misappre-
ter 1917 of the laws Of 1855. There is reasonable
doubt that the act invalid but it Is probable that
vii, be at once passed repeating Chapter lst The
b had been sent 10 ns Mayor ol sroo orer i op
Friday las. to the Assembly disapproved II was.
city" and on the same day sent TO the Executive
Chamber. with the result that to-day it was signed
awaiting his signature Under the new CONSTITUTION
bills rejected by city must thereafter be passed
atty before being sant to the Governor, and this
course not followed in relation TO this bill
The bill in question dr. under the direc-
ton of Jacob Worth. the Plat Republican boss"
OF Brooklyn, and it provided for the election Of
Aldermen in Brooklyn by Senate districts. Worth
thinks such a Jaw would give him control of the
Board of Aldermen OF Brooklyn and all the patron
age it The bill opposed in the Iregis-
laure vainiy by the reform element Of the Repub-
lcan party in Brooklyn. Jacob Worth came here.
hired house and lobbied for the measure BY the
influence of Thomas c. Patt he at last had it
passed.
The Dill reached Mayor Scheren 0n Mafch H. ana
he gave a public hearing on it on March 30 and on
March IS he returned II to the Legislature without
his approval At the time Mayor Schieren
made the following statement in opposition to the
bill:
The bin has little. if any, advantage over our
present system. and substantially all Of the
evil that is alleged against the present system IL
does give united representa- ton. and the re-
sponsbility is divided. for instance, in the First
Senatorial Aldermanic District, comprising the
first six wards of Brooklyn. What interest has
versa? And why should the Sixth Ward vote for
an Alderman OF the Fourth and Fifth? Besides,
two wards in THAI district could not he represented
in the Board OF Aldermen. and could very easily
% Te IN ha Are consderrS epubcan
They could never hope 70 be represented IN the
Fifth and Sixth. 1t is the same evil that now ex-
lists. Why shall We continue it when the Assembly
equality? For this Legislature to enact law which
reform measure % for several Years to- come Be-
sides it quite apparent that the system pro- o.
deals and combinations in the nominations for A.
dermen to much greater degree than would be the
the Assembly District plan plan sum-
Upon the receipt Of the vetoed bill in the As
Glo~eT failed e to notice Mayor schieTsns mem
it ON to- GoVenor Morton with this stamp upon it.
Approved by the Mayor" and Governor MSsion
there was naturally commotion. and every poll
tcian aware that the bill after being vetoed by the
for It's approval mystihed. kilograms were sent
TO Albany. asking when the bills had been passed
over the Mayors One OF these kilograms
came into Governor Morton's hands, and he. OF
astOnShed.
An examination of the bill In the office OF the
Secretary Of State revealed the Mayors mem
orandum of disapproval. and led TO the issuing OF
the statement from the Governor quoted above.
Jacob Worth therefore, will have TO have his
bill introduced again. and once more il will en-
counter the veto of Mayor Schieren. Possibly
Governor Morton. now being aware OF Mayor
Scherens hostility will refuse TO sign 1t when 1t
comes to him a second time.