Year: 1874

| Mayor Havemeyer has added another as
founding feature to the complications spring
ing out of the conviction of the two Police
Commissioners, Charick and Gardner When
he appointed them to succeed each other he
was guilty of an act that few men would have
had the courage to commit; but it now seems
that he has accepted their designations
second time and filled the vacancies by the
appointment of George W. Matsell, at present
Superintendent of Police, and John r. Voor-
his, who is President of the Excise Board
by Havemeyer's selection Neither of these
appointments is such as would have been
fit to be made even if the Mayor had pro-
ceeded regularly upon receiving notice from
the Governor of the existence Of the vacancies.
The same objections which applied to MIR.


Matsells appointment as Police Superintend-
ent are to be urged with even greater force to
his appointment as Police Commissioners He
is simply unfit for the Office, as every
citizen of New York is well aware. Nor
should Mr.. Voorhis have been selected
for the other vacancy, because OF the
want of that experience in public affairs
which the Office imperatively demands at this
time But We need scarcely stop to discuss their
fitness or unftness, because the circumstances
surrounding their appointment are just now
of paramount Importance 1t may even be
question whether their appointment is legal.
If it was made to fill the vacancies occasioned
by the second designations of Charlick and
Gardner it is clearly illegal Though
the Mayor is retreating from the false
position he assumed at the time he
got the Police Commissionership off
his mind, his retreat began too late.
His offence was complete when he reappointed
the evicted Commissioners. Mr.. Gardner, at
least, acted under the authority conferred by
that wrongful appointment, for which the
Mayor must take his part of the responsibility.
Besides, this latest act of the Mayor only adds
to the difficulties of the situation as it affects
himself. Did he reappoint Gardner and Char
lick to fill the vacancies occasioned by their
designations or those created by their
conviction? In either case their ap-
pointment was void and it was equally
as impossible for them to resign the
second time as the first And SO the Mayors
offence is not cured by the sudden and as
founding somerset of yesterday. Indeed,
he has only emphasized his offence by adding
to it these new complications, and more than
ever proved his unftness for the Office he now
holds. Matters have gone too tar to be stopped
by backdown that is at once cowardly and
ludicrous, and it is not likely that public
opinion will be appeased by the new found
ol;o Of tha To o1ya
at all tenabe it must be assumed that Matsell
and voorhs have been appointed to fill the
original vacancies but as this does not cure
the Mayors offence against the law in his
previous action, that question remains
to be decided precisely as if Matsell and
Voorhis had not been appointed at all. Any
other position would be as untenable and
official misconduct still remain, and, we pre-
sumo, the Governor, who yesterday signifed
his Willingness to hear the complaints of the
committee OF citizens, now in Albany for the
purpose of laying these charges before him,
will adhere to his determination, giving such
weight to the new phase of the question as
its Importance may demand


III
are to be laid before the Governor-one by
Mr. Wingate, as the counsel of Oswald Often
dorfer, John Kelly and William H. Wickham,
and the other by Mr. Henry L. Clinton, on be-
half of other citizens. In the former paper
the history of the investigation into the cor
ruptions of the Street Cleaning Bureau is set
forth, as well as the facts relating to the viola
tions of the Election law, which led to the
indictment and conviction of the Commits
sioners of Police. The ground is taken that
the facts developed in the inquiry by the
legislative committee of last winter and in
the more recent examination before the Su-
preme Court were of public notoriety, must
have been known to the Mayor and made it
his duty under his official oath to institute an
investigation and remove the officials impli-
Gated if the charges against them should
have been substantiated; that the Mayor
not only neglected this duty, but sub
sequently when the charges against the
Police Commissioners were officially laid
before him by the Board of Aldermen,
accompanied by request for their removal,
refused or neglected to take action thereon.
The Indictment. conviction and reappoint-
ment Of Messrs Charlick and Gardner are
then recounted, and the action of Mr.. Have
meyer is denounced as inconsistent with his
duties as Mayor gross violation of his Off
cial oath, an outrage without precedent in the
history of the State, threatening to the peace
and good order of the city, calculated to
bring the administration Of justice into con-
tempt, and demanding his immediate removal
by the Governor Mr.. Clinton's memorial is
more concise. It is confined to the single
point of the reappointment of the convicted
Commissioners by the Mayor in defiance of
the law. It sets forth that after the notice of