The herald., 1897-02-21
SUNDAY, FEBRUARY Al, 1907.
AN INSPECTOR OF BOILERS

In repeating the ordinance providing
for an inspector of boilers 1t would seem
that the council has attempted to DO
by indirection what it had not the cour-
age to do in straightforward way. The
general understanding is that the coun-
Gil or some influential portion of 1t
was dissatisfied with the boiler inspect
or, and in order to get rid of him pro-
ceeded to abolish the office. This plan
has been carried to the length of adopt
ing a repeating ordinance. which, by the
way. has not yet been approved by the
mayor, and should not be. If the coun-
Gil wishes to remove an incompetent or
Objectionable official. it would seem
that there should be some more direct
and business-like way than by abolish
ing the office.
But it Is in the air that the city's
soons do not propose to abolish the Of
flee for good and all, but that as soon
as the boiler deck is cleared. they will
adopt another ordinance recreating
nearly the same thing, with the appoint
ing power lodged in the council instead
of the mayor
If this latter surmlse be true, then
there is plainly an Interior purpose lurk-
ing behind the councils action, and that
purpose is a grab for patronage. This
furnishes another reason why the mayor
should veto the repeating ordinance.
against an increase of patronage in the
hands of legislative bodies, since such
powers invariably lead to the formation
of cliques and rings, striving to rifle the
public purse. The reform idea-the one
adopted by our Better City Government
league-is one that makes provision for
an increase of appointive power in the
mayor, and the placing of more direct
responsibility upon his shoulders.
This projected deal Of the council is
an Introduction of political patronage
into city affairs by "forcible entry"
1t is dangerous and against the public
interests. Playing hide-and-seek with
city ordinances on matters of vital in
terest to get one man out and to get
another man in is not in any sense of
the term a square deal" The present
is too good a council to go on with this
personal business after examination and
reflection upon the ill-advised character
Of the precedent, If the present boiler
inspector is not an efficient, competent
and reliable man he should be removed.
If the councils candidate fills the re-
quirements Of the responsible office of
boiler inspector better than anyone else
he ought to be appointed to the office
Whatever the facts may be on these
personal questions of capacity and reli-
ability, it remains clear that the repeal
Of necessary city ordinance to secure
property and life should not be used to
promote personal politics.
But considering the partially consum-
mated repeal of the system of boiler in
spection, perhaps we have no right to
introduce speculations as to motives
or objects. The question that confronts
us is this: Should we have a nuniclnal
inspection Of boilers? Let the matter
OF expense be entirely waived, since that
is borne entirely by special taxes laid
upon the owners of steam plants, and
from licenses of engineers. Concedinc
that it costs the taxpayers generally
nothing for this service, is it desirable
to have steam plants inspected and en-
gineers licensed?
Los Angeles certainly should have a
system of boiler inspection. The con-
ditions of life in a large city today force
all sorts Of property owners to Use boil