The San Francisco call., 1897-12-22
Gross Extravaganza the Cause
Of Shortages in Several
Funds.
How Positions Were Created for
Relatives Of City Council
Members.
Special Dispatch to The Call.

city treasury, the past extravagant
policy of the Common Council is being
recalled and discussed with great in
terest. Two Of the largest shortages
are in the police fund and the street
contingent fund In the former there
is shortage of about $500, and in the
latter about $4,000
1t was just a year ago that the Coun-
ell, then composed of T. c. Hogan, w
I. Noting, A. S. Mangrum, ]. P Fay,
Z. P. Main, G. B. Dittus, J. P Jarman
and julius Krieg. increased the police
and fire department forces in the face
OF one of the strongest and most sting
ing veto messages ever written by a
municipal executive. The order in
creasing the forces was passed origin
ally by the votes of Dittus, Fay
Hogan, Krieg, Main and Noting
Those who opposed its passage were
Jarman and Mangrum. The order was
subsequently passed over Mayor
Koch's veto by the same vote. The
Mayors message on the subject is ex-
tremely apropos of the present situa-
ton. 1t is here given in full:
To the Hon. the Common Council of
the City of San Observation-Disclosures: AS
Mayor Of the city of San Jose, and
duty to those whom both your honorable
body and myself represent, l am con-
strained to veto the order passed by the
Council on December 16 last, providing
for the election of police officers and
members of the Fire Department.
A nroper respect for public opinion i'm
pels me TO Indicate the reasons for such
disapprOval
In the first place and before contem-
plating in this instance the use of the
veto power, the executive is confronted
4 viz NnHy
was 1t deemed necessary to increase the
numerical strength of the police force of
the city? 1 have failed to obtain a sat
isfactory or even plausible answer
At this season of the year and during
times of business depression the inquiry
seems specially pertinent. The city of
san Jose we'll deserves the reputation 1t
bears among the municipalities of the
State of being a peaceable community,
and there would seem TO be no possible
reason why an additional burden of $4201
should be shouldered upon the taxpay-
ers. Especially is this obnoxious when
the added load of taxation is placed upon
the people in COntravention of the laws
by which We are governed.
IT would appear from the manner in
which the order was made that it was
the intention of the Council not to con-
duct the affairs of the city in an honest
and economic manner for the benefit of
the taxpayers, but to subserve the pur-
poses Of political schemers and to aid
in the payment of political obligations.
Such prostitution of trust will not be
and should not be countenanced either
by the body of citizens with whom our
duty lies and whose interests you are
sworn TO protect, nor by myself as the
city'S executive.
The views here expressed are held by
me not only as Mayor of the city bound
by oath to honest performance of duty
but also from the standpoint of a citizen
interested in the welfare of the city and
solicitOus only for the prosperity of the
people.
Aside from the fact of needless expense
incurred, though this seems little better
Ihan pIratICal grab at the money of
the taxpayers, there are other reasons
why the course taken by the Council
should meet the condemnation of every
citizen possessing an atom of personal
or political integrity
Among these reasons may be mentioned
the numerical strength of the police force
you have lessened it's efficiency You
have removed officers of experience and
character to make room for your rela-
tions, native and imported. Some Of
these new ones, too, are not only lacking
IN proper training for positions on the
police force, but have passed the time
or life when they may be expected to
make efficient officers
have no criticism for those of the
Council who have not posed before the
people as reformers, and whose officers
is not held and obtained upon the faith
that ante-election pledges of reform
and economy would be carried out The
action Of others, however, and l now re-
fer more particularly to that preacher
of economy, that apostle of reform,
owing his office as Councilman to the
voters Of the Third Ward of the city at
the last election. So far as he is con-
cerned the action of the Council in so
far that action has been aided by his
vote, Is in my judgment a violation of
duty. and plain and simple betrayal of
public trust
To summarize the foregoing:
veto the order referred to because
1t is contrary to law.
/ veto the order because 1t necessitates
waste of public money.
l veto the order because 1t presents a
sample Of nepotism that no yell-gov-
erned city should tolerate
l veto the order because the oath
which l have taken demands veto
Mayor of the City of San Jose.
The Third Ward Councilman re-
ferred to is George B. Dittus. One of
the native" relatives alluded to by
the Mayor is Henry Ford, the Chief of
the Fire Department. He is
brother-in-law of Councilman Noting.
While Ford is credited with hav-
ing made very creditable Chief. J. 2.
Dwyer, whom he superseded, had the
confidence and support of the best citi-
zens. When the election for firemen
and policemen was about to be held
last December, petitions advocating
the reelection Of Dwyer were filed
with the Council by the Santa Clara
Insurance Association and by Wooster
& Whitton, one of the most prominent
real estate firms in the county.
The imported" relative was James
Showers, who left a farm at Mountain
View to accept a position on the police
force of San Jose. Showers is a.
brother-in-law of ex-Councilman E. P.
Main.
It is worthy Of note that the four
members of the present Council were
among those who voted for increasing
the burden Of the taxpayers in this
connection.
Another bit Of extravaganza was
the employment by the Council of
twenty-three watering carts during
the months of May, June, July, August
and September last. This action was
taken against the strenuous protest of
the Mayor, who claimed that eighteen
carts would be ample to properly
water the streets Of the city. Each
driver received s65 u month, and the
water for each cart cost about the
same amount per month. Thus the
employment of five less carts would
have saved to the city not less than
s3250.
Here In two instances alone the city
might have been saved the sum of