The San Francisco call., 1897-03-29
NOTHING TO FEAR
\ FROM A RECOUNT
Davies Friends Are Max
ing the Contest to
Settle Bets.
Need of NV Method of Elect.
ing a Judge for the Police
Court.
Council men-at.Large Are a Menace
Rather Than. an Irducent to
Go d Government
OAKLAND OFFICE SAN FRANCISCO CALL,
9OS Broadway, March 2S

OAKLAND OFFICE SAN FRANCISCO CALI
90S Broadway, March %.
The recount OF the votes cast Tor the
two leading candidates for Mayor had for
its origin circumstances that are very un-
usual. Mayor Dsvie does not desire a re-
count and has frequently stated that he is
not putting up one penny of the money
necessary 20 conduct the contest, and that
he does not know who are the prime NOV
ers in the matter.
Strange as it may seem this is probably
true for The contest has been undertaken
by men who have pooled their issues for
the purpose of having satisfaction regard
ipg some election bets. They are of the
pinion that Davie was counted out and
Vhat a recount will show that Captain
fhomas was not elected. Some o. these
men do not hesitate to admit that they
made bets, although knowing full well
that such an action is criminal offense.
The supporters of Captain Thomas are
in an unenviabIe position. They are not
anxious to see him forced to pay one-half
the expenses OF a recount which the law
now requires Sf a contestant, and they do
not want it 10 appear that they are afraid
OF the consequences of a recount, because
they most assIredly are not. 1t would be,
perhaps more satisfactory If all efforts to
oppose the recount were at once stopped
and loyal Republicans do for their candi-
date what Dawes friends are doing for
him-shoulder the responsibility and COST
of a recount. There is nothing TO fear
from another count. as was proved yester-
day.
The First Ward was recounted in con-
test OF Councilman, and a snap tally
-ad hat N hNa mad Fazy
II, as was alleged, the railroad politicians
were working Tor Davie, their work would
certainly be approved in the First Ward
but there was no evidence of either fraud
or carelessness. There is nothing to lead
to a belief that a recount will alter the
result.
In Saturdays recount the charges of
irregularity were more sweeping than
those made in the contest over the mayor
atty, and 1t is but reasonable to suppose
that nothing more will come of the latter
than of the former.
There will soon be another complica-
ton over the appointing power of the
Police Judge. 1t is authoritatively an
nouuced Mayor Thomas will, as soon as
he takes office, reinstate Justice Wood, who
was unseated by Mayor Dayie a week ago
in favor OF Justice Allen. Both men were
elected as Justices of the Peace, and the
charter says that the Mayor shall have
the authority to denote winch of the two
shall occupy the Police Court. The JUS
tices take office the first of the year, but
as Judge " ood was on the Police bench
and was reelected he was not disturbed
until after Davie was defeated in the mu-
nicipal election.
Now the point arises, is a failure to
make caange virtually an appointment
of the Incumbent If so, then Wood
cr.1l ha Ian ~;
right, however, even if it existed, he has
lost by giving way TO Judge Allen with
out protest. Now, if Mayor Davie can re-
move Judge when he has served three
months of his term, cannot Captain
Thomas make another change after Judge
Allen has served another portion of the
term? And If so, there is nothing to pre-
vent the Mayor from making a change
every week.
This possibility, carried to a inality,
means that if a venal Mayor be elected he
could be so Influenced that he could ap-
point for the time being whichever of the
two Judges could be of most "use," on
the police bench. Such a state of affairs
was, of course, never contem plated by the
trainers of the charter, and needs correc-
ton. 1t is pretty certain that there will
be some amendments 10 the charter be-
fore the next city election, and one of
them should provide for the election OF 8
''Police judge and Justice OF the
Peace" "for the city of Oakland" and
then such unpleasantness as will be wit
messed next month will be avoided.
The recent election has caused the ques-
ton to be asked of what use are the four
offices of Council m men-at-large. There are
seven wards in the city and each returns
one Councilman. In addition there are
four elected ''at large" The argument
has been N ade and it must be admitted
with q cood deal of foundation that the
four votes in the Council "at large" con-
troll the other seven. This is true in the
case OF vetoed measure, as eight votes
are necessary to pass an ordinance over
q veto, but it is o more true OF the four
votes "at large" than of any other four OF
the total OF eleven votes.
But the salient feature OF the argument
against the four votes at large is this. Can
didates for the office are voted upon by
every voter in the city, inde pendent OF
wards. 1t is Acknowledged that any po-
liticaI ele ment can, by concentrating its
strength in the whole city, carry every
thing desired, provided that enough can
didates can be put up to sufficiently split
the total vote. 1t has always been the
practice to 10 this and then to center on
the four votes wanted. This gives the
solid four power to prevent anything be-
ing passed over q veto, except some con-
cession be made. In this way it can
readily be seen that the Mayor and the
four Councilmen "at large" can entirely
nullify the work of all the Councilman
from The wards.
FIVE Supervisors are elected in the
county-one from each district-aDd no
citizen would dream of wanting a couple
of Supervisors "at large" in the Hall OF
Records. There is no more reason why
there should be CouncImen "at laree" in
the City Hall. STUART w. BOOTH.
-----------