New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-01-18
The News of Brooklyn

tons which must result from the consolidation Of
all that territory into one city, the result under
our present constitution would be to make Great
err New-York a conglomeration of five territories
each OF whose financial affairs must be governed
by a separate Board Of Supervisors with its own
debt-contracting power, with a city government
perched upon the five, with its own debt-con-
tracing power also. Such a monstrosty in city
government does not commend itself to me am
DESTROYS of simplicity and economy in municipal
administration
CHARTER AND VETO
Mr. Benedict proceeded to take up another
phase of the Constitution and maintained that
there was proviso which said that any egisa-
ton which related TO city shall be referred to
the Mayor Of that city for approval and that he
should have particular and qualified veto power.
Should the bill pass he said. land become a
law. on January l, 1898. what would be the posi-
ton Of the two mayors in regard to that power?
The bill, which proposed to establish one city,
also provides for the appointment Of commits
sion to frame not a charter for the new city-not
a word concerning charter-but to frame bills
whereby the territory which is TO be made
one city is to be governed
In my opinion. If that bill We're to become a
law the two cities as now constituted would
would be Mayor under that bill. nor has any one
else. There is no provision that know Of in that
bill to elect Mayor
In answer to a question at this point by Mr.
Lexow who asked if Mr. Benedict did not believe
that future legislation would look out for that
Mr.. Benedict replied:
Yes. But to whom would the bill be submit
ted If it is to be fulfilled before any election such
as you have proposed TO take place in 1891? VINO
would be Mayor of the city? There is no clause
to cover this question.
Mr. Lexow asked why does II not come under
the constitutional provsion?
Mr.. Benedict replied Because the Cons.itu-
ton as | recollect it requires that legislation re-
lating to the city has to be submitted to the
Mayor of that city. You cannot have a Mayor or
Brooklyn If you wipe out the corporate existence
OF Brooklyn.
long controversy followed between Mr..
Lexow and Mr.. Benedict relating to The power CT
the Constitution to provide an executive Tor
say that he knew that during the campajt n
which resulted in what he called vote of inde-
cisive expression Of opinion the question OF con-
solidation was not discussed by the city.
That came afterward. Neither party desired
to discuss It then. The people thought they were
voting merely an expression OF opinion, Whlcn
did not carry with 1t. by any means, the acuNe
thought Of consolidation.
THE VOTE EXPRESSED NOTHING.
81 cannot believe, Mr.. Chairman he con-
tnued, that if the question had been Under
stood there would have been )ne-tenth of the
voters who would have refraned from voting II
the Legislature vii! submit that question again,
there will not in my opinion. be a man in this
city who would fail to vote. The main reason
why this question should be resubmit:ed is that
the vote was ndecisiye and expressed nothirS;
and moreover, ii was taken without iull under
standing and knowledge Of its Importance. TIE
existence of Brooklyn should not De wiped out
until we have had fair vote.