New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1899-04-21
NO STATE CONSTABULARy THIS y

NJ STATE CONS1ABOLARl THIS YEAR.
The defeat of the State Constabulary bill is
apparently assured by the positive and con.
certed declarations Of Senators Armstrong and
Parsons that they will not vote for it under
any circumstances Senator Coggeshalls oppo-
sition had already been announced, and what
ever course may finally be taken by Senator
Willis. whose position Is uncertain, there is
seemingly no possibility that the bill can re-
ceive the necessary twenty-six votes We have
hoped from the first, for reasons which we have
repeatedly given, that the bill would be beaten
and shall be glad to record its final defeat.
The Governor says, with obvious dsappoint-
ment that he has done all that he could do
for the Constabulary bill. 1t Is said that he
might have done more by making some dis
reputable bargain; or, to be more accurate. that
another Governor might possibly have done
more by tactics OF which Mr. Roosevelt is in
capable. But We see no necessity for such an in
situation. There Is reason TO believe that only a
small minority Of the good people Of this State
have favored the passage without debate. under
despotic political pressure in the last DAYS OF
the session. Of an exceedingly important and
indeed revolutionary bill transferring to Repub-
lican control the police administration of six
I :
pressed that Governor Roosevelt should SID
port such measure, not because the objects
which he thinks 1t would accomplish are IN
desirable, but because there Is so little warra nj
for believing that those objects would be ac-
compllshed. Our explanation is that the Gov
ernor is misled by looking at the question too
exclusively from the point of view Of his own
intentions and his confidence in his own moral
cto mil 10 civ
to the consideration that he could guarantee
good results for only about eighteen months.
and that thereafter the politics from which he
would be glad to divorce police admins
tration might have free course indefinitely.
Our belief Is that there are serious intrinsic OBJ
jectons TO the scheme In the form which II
has suddenly taken, and that its defects would
defeat the purposes Of its disnterested advo-
Gates.
But that Is not the only moral argument
against the BILL and we are not sure that II
is the strongest political argument The people
OF New-York have not learned from OBSERVE
ton and experience to like what has come 10
be known as the tanning through" process.
They think that II is in itself a discreditable
method OF Legislation, and the operation OF laws
enacted in that manner has not generally tended
to set 1t In a more favorable light In this In
stance 1t has been proposed TO force the adop-
ton of radically new principle of police ad-
ministration. for which In at least five of the
cities affected there has been. to put the case
with extreme caution, no demand, and for n
fair discussion of which. or even an intelligent
understanding, no opportunity has been af-
forded. We do not deny that the policy Of State
control Of the police through the application
Of a carefully matured and impartially sup
ported scheme may be well worth trying. but