The Portland daily press., 1897-05-01
The City Charter.
he Editor of the Press:

TO the Editor Of the Press:
| Under section fifteenth. "The mayor
subject to the approval of the aldermen
may remove an officer, commissioner, Oh
member of a board. appointed by the
mayor as aforesaid, for such cause as he
shall deem sufficient, and. shall assign 1t IN
writing in his order for removal and SAID
order for removal shall he tiled with the
city clerk and be open to public 1nspec-
tion."
Such absolute authority ought not, as 1t
seems to me- to be vested in mayor, not
w,thstanding IL cannot he exercised With
out the approval of majority OF the
alderin en- Il do not believe 1t is safe to de-
pend upon majority of the aldermen to
protoct an officer in many cases against
the personal piq ne of the mayor.
1t is contra ry to the spirit of our Re-
pu blican and Democratic laws to remove
an officer without the Formally of pre-
ferred charges and an opportunity to be
heard in defence or explanation.
1t does not help the case that the cause
of his removal be entered on record wher
all can read it. but it greatly aggravates
the offence against good morals and
public policy.
| If there were no other serious objection
to the proposed charter, this alone ought
to totally condemn it in New England,
where the people are proud of the safe
guards which protect the reput ations of
individuals as we'll as their persons and
property.
| This fifteenth section is clearly from
the pen of parvenu in legislation. 1t
smacks of the despotism of the middle
ages. and under it no officers good name
is safe nor his tenure of office secure.
The exercise Of the private malice of q
bad mayor, who Notwithstanding may
command the majority of the aldermen
should be guarded against in the charter
| as 1t seems to me.
every officer to whom the provision il ap-
plicahle, and degrades him to the petty
| tool Of the mayor.
1t has been unadvisedly said that city
Is business corporation. That ia pre-
oisely what it Is not. 1t is political
corporation, that is to say local civil
government, having the dearest political
/
Of the city, to very great extent, in It's
keeping. 1t is the local state.
Their lives, liberties, regulations, and
| properties are protected, as far as pos
sible, by the police. the magistrates, and
the various public officers of the city, all
of them clothed with the authority of the
law and amenable to it, and to provide
by charter that any Of them may be dis
charged like the employees of a business
corporation is to niisapprehend the funo-
tons of good local government.
Section ten, which provides that the
aldermen be elected for the long term of
three years is III my opinion a grave
blunder. There is nothing in the history
of municipal governments to justify it, 1t
IL founded on the business corporation
idea, which is contrary to both principle
and precedent. The old charter provides
for annual election as 1t ought in my
Judgment. External vigilance in the price
of liberty" Now we elect annually our
aldermen and councilmen, and by good
custom in both parties the faithful and
efficient are reelected.
This gives practically term of two
yeais to the deserving. There is no legal
bar to as many subsequent elections as
eminent services may render desirable.
This method OF locnl government insti-
tuted by our fathers, has stood the practi-
cal test of the experience of successive
generations OF QUE new EnRlduu peODle,
for more than two hundred and fifty
years; and now when even greater yigi-
lence of our American citizens is neoes-
sary in order to keep the political affairs
of the people always in the hands of the
people, it is proposed to put it beyond the
power of the people to change bad CITY
government at q single annual election,
by electipg them for three years, which
by custom of reelection extends the term
practically to six years.
1t 1t be proposed to put our city govern
ment into the hands of syndicate of q
few persons, and keep 1t there, this is
precisely the way to do 1T.
| l have felt it my duty to explain these
two sections of the proposed charter to
that portion OF my fellow citizens who
have not perhaps carefully read and con-
sidered them. Let 1t be understood that
those who are opposed to the new charter
should vote "no.''
L. B. DENNETT.