New-York tribune., 1902-11-29
CHIEF CROKER'S REMOVAL.

Commissioner Sturgis in his statement Of the
| reasons for removing Chief Croker makes
much stronger case than the condensed reports
in the newspapers of the testimony at the trial
gave reason to expect. His findings of fact
should be carefully studied by the public before
they finally make UP their minds on the merits
+ of the case. Without doubt there has been
strong popular sentiment in favor of Chief Gro
ker. but popular sentiment is not a safe guide
in such matters Neither is the recommends
ton OF underwriters about whose eulogies of
Chief Croker so much has been said The I'M
derwriters naturally stand by the chief they
happen at any time TO have. They have no
desire TO incur his resentment. If the records
were searched we believe it would he found
that the underwriters had been equally en-
thusiastic in commendation of other chiefs, In
Guiding one of notorious bad habits and unfit
ness.
Popular judgment on the removal of Chief
Croker should not be formed by impressions or
testimonials but by the facts as brought out in
the trial. If the Chief failed to obey the law in
the conduct of the department his removal was
not merely justified. but commanded The
Commissioner finds that Chief Croker delib-
eratey violated the plain mandate of the law
in failing 10 inspect the Park Avenue Hotel and
have placed there proper fire apparatus
doubtless have saved many lives. This finding
seems TO be fully warranted by the evidence
quoted. The Commissioner also finds that the
Chief failed at the list Regiment Armory fire
to take the precautions required by the rules
Of the department to guard the Park Avenue
Hotel and warn its inmates. It is conceded
that Chief Croker was brave, and he probably
thought on that occasion that he was doing his
duty, but It is held that his generalship was
bad and his mistake cost many lives. gen
eral in command of an army is removed if he
makes disastrous blunders no matter how good
his intentions, and the same rule must apply to
a force like the Fire Department where good
judgment and generalship are all important in
a commander. The Chief is also found guilty
Of giving department hose to private persons.
He defended the action as proper, and said he
would give hose TO places like the Cathedral or
a great department store statement which
showed curious view Of his duty. since the
law IS specific in requiring owners Of such
places to provide needed hose at their own ex-
pense. The Chief is found guilty of discrimina-
ton among his subordinates, and several in
stances are given Of his use of personal threats
and frequent transfers 10 drive from the de-
partnIent or exclude from promotion fremen
who had displeased him in matters unconnect-
ed with their official duties. Several other
charges are dismissed Some fires complained
Of the Commissioner holds he handled properly
He considers his use of public property for pri-
vate use an extravaganza rather than a con-
version. He makes no finding on the charge
Of soliciting passes, though he clearly regards
it well founded. Chief Croker on the stand re-
fused 10 answer questions about this. The fact
/ probably Is that officers in every department of
/ the Tammany government. and perhaps of the
/ present one, have asked such favors in viola
! ton Of law. Few of them are foolish enough
TO leave any official records which suggest it. as
/ Chief Croker did.
! On one other charge the Chief is found guilty.
That is insubordination. This is the unfortu-
nate feature of the whole affair The Commits
sioner, it must be conceded, gives good
/ grounds for his view Of the Chiefs conduct
/ The public, however, viii not be likely to take
this purely official view of the case. They will
listen to the talk of earlier friction and attrib-
ute the Chiefs action to his determination to
protect himself by being on the ground They
7 will also ask why the other charges were not
brought before the Chief made himself person
ally obnoxious. Thus the personal elements
will tend TO discount in the popular mind the
! fairness Of the judgment on other charges