New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-01-28
ALDERMEN IN A WRANGLE.
NO ACTION TAKEN ON BONDS OF THE
DEPARTMENT HEADS.

DOTH srDrs spr,r OVER THE CONFlRMATION OF
THE COMMITTEE LrsTs-A SPECIAL MEET
ING CALLED By MAYOR wIEsTER
Fractional differences among the Democratic
as we'll as the Republican members or the bFooH-
lyn Board os Aldermen prevented meeting Vi
that bodv Yesterday afternoon and consequently
the bonds OF the rev heads OF departments APP
pointed by Mayor Wurster were not approved
.rhs would have prevented the new men from
taking office on February unless special meet
ing were called for that purpose, as the Boaru
adjourned Yesterday Until next Monday As
AEON ne Mayor Wurster heard OF the failure OF
the Board Of Aldermen to transact any business
ne called a special meeting Of the Board for TO-
morrow.
The Board met promptly at ? o'clock. with
President Clark in the chair. The space o"'siue
the rail was packed full of spectators ana many
favored ones had been admitted within inc inner
circle through the doors leading to the commit
tee rooms Alderman Guilfoyle moved that the
Board take a recess for fifteen minutes Inc re-
suit OF this vote proved that there was break
In the ranks OF the Democratic members OF the
Board ns well as among the Republicans. Inc
Democrats who voted for Alderman Guilfoye's
motion were Aldermen Conley john j. Dunn
Denis r. Dunno Guilfoyle. Doyle. Hennessy and
singer Singleton Thompson. Oitrogge Wass-
muth. Leich, Francisco, Haubert, Williams ana
Clark.
The Democrats met in one OF the committee
rooms and held a short caucus. Ii was said that
Alderman Guifoye tried to bring them all INTO
line to vote for the approval OF the committees
Of the Board as named by President clark. In
this he was unsuccessful. however, and when
the Board met after recess Alderman Guilfoyle
at once offered a motion that the Board adjourn
for one week. The motion was carried by vote
of II TO 9. Those who opposed the motion were
Leaycraft Stewart. Taylor. Schlusser and Rug
giles. Republicans, and Bacher. Donlon Maurei
and Weton, Democrats.
There wac much talk OF deals" and "Combina-
lions" and the Republicans who opposed adj
journment, and WHO the same men who
voted with the Democrats last week Cor the APP
pointment of Frank Weeks as assistant SER
geant-at-arms, were not backward In returning
the taunts thrown ont az the previous meeting
After the Board adjourned there was anxious
inquiry made Of the members Of the Board as 70
the reasons for the adjournment. One OF those
who voted against the motion said to Tribune
reporter: The truth is that the powers that
would bel mean the Republican members Of the
Board who would assume to dictate TO their fel-
low-members how they should vote on every
question that is brought up-were AFRAID mat
they would not have enough votes TO confirm the
list Of commit ices made up by President clark
and his advisers. If you will look through that
list you Will see that Otrogge. Francisco, LEIGH
and Hauhert are on the Committees on ran
roads Finance and, in fact, every important
committee, while each Of them has four or five
charmanshtcs. 49,
There are two three Democrats-Guifoyie
Hennessy and Dunn--whs, while they have not,
CT course Jared as well as The Republicans have
come In for soft places Alderman Gull
foyle | understand. trieG 20 get the Democrats
10 vote for President Clarks committees. but
while four of them agreed to this. he could not
get them TO vote in favor Of confirming these ap-
po.ntments while there was any reason 20 believe
that the Republicans were divided on the ques-
ton. There a ruDIUr 10 That erect before
the Board met. and the Republicans who voted
for adjournment did so because they feared
motion would be made and carried TO lay the list
Of committees on the table
This much is certain There are men in the
Board who have Just honorable a record as
those who have been making charges of deals
and it is the belief of some of these men that
the makeup OF the committees gives as pain an
indication of a deal. II not palmer. as the vote
OF Republicans for the appointment OF an eihcient
man as an official of the Board For my part,
will say that favor the laying over OF every re-
port for one week from the time it is received
bers can have full time to investigate it, and
there Will be no snap action.
None Of the members Of the Board were willing
20 say why the adjournment was taken, but
there is good reason to believe that had the list
OF committees named by President Clark been
presented Il would have been laid on the table
by the vote of all the Democrats, with possibly
Ncans who voted against the motion to adjourn.