Year: 1877


"keep himself informed Of the doings OF the
several departments = "to be vigilant and
active in causing the ordinances OF the city
and laws of the State to be executed and
enforced, and to remove any head OF city
department ''for cause, and after oppor-
tunity to be heard, subject, however, before
such removal shall take effect, to the APP
proval Of the Governor, expressed in writ
ing" Mayor Ely, six days ago, notified
the Police Commissioners that ''the duty OF
cleaning the streets, which is devolved
upon that department, has been ineffi-
ciently performed !" that ''the unclean and
filthy condition of the streets during the
present year has not only been public
scandal and disgrace to the city, but has
recently been reported by the Health De-
partment as dangerous to the public
health, Notwithstanding the expenditure
OF sum Of money amply sufficient for
the proper performance of the work"
of cleaning the streets, and that the
statutes of the State have not been


enforced by them faithfully, but ''capri-
ciously and by raid. in such manner as to
render law odious instead of respected"
When these charges were made every one
supposed that the Mayor, in keeping him
self informed Of the doings Of the Police


Department had become convinced OF the
facts set forth in his arraignment Of the
Commissioners and had resolved to remove
them for this cause and to appoint in their
place officers who would properly execute
and enforce the ord nancos of the city and
laws Of the State. No person had right to
doubt what the final action Of the Mayor
would be. The case was not one for trial.


The charges against the Police Commission
ers were not preferred by outside parties,
requiring the Mayor to investigate them
and ascertain whether OF not they were well
founded They were made by the Mayor
himself, after having informed himself of
the Police Departments doings, in ac-
cordance with his official duty. They were
based on facts known to every citizen who
visits the crowded tenement house districts
of the city, SO far as they related to
the neglect of the street cleaning busi-
ness, and were matter OF notoriety SO
far as they referred to the periodical
and spasmodic police raids on the violators
of law. There seemed as little reason to
question the Governors approval of the re-
movals. But the Police Commissioners
seem to have obtained aid and comfort from
unexpected quarters, and it will not be sur
prising now if the movement inaugurated
to oust them should end in failure. Such
movements frequently fail when opposed
by influential party leaders and office
holders SO potential that it is embarrassing,
il not dangerous, for Mayor or Governor
to offend them. 1t will not, therefore, be
surprising to find the Governor (if the
charges should ever reach him) pigeonhole
them in accordance with distinguished d
precedent, and allow the present Police
Commissioners to continue to mismanage
that department Of the New York city gov
ernment. 1t will not even be surprising to
find the Mayor shrink before the opposing
forces and abandon his original intention OF
removing the Commissioners for the positive
delinquencies charged against them in his
letter of December 49, Such q deficiency
OF backbone would only be consistent
with the weakness which permitted
the Commissioners to force sort Of trial
upon their judge, to place him on the de-
fensive, and to leave the public puzzled to
decide whether the Mayor himself or the
Commissioners stood in the position Of the
accused party. 1t was as if Lambert, the
convicted insurance president when called
up for sentence, should by brazenness and
effrontery seek to take his seat on the bench
and compel Judge Brady to stand at the bar


Mayor Ely had q simple duty to perform,
He is bound to see that the laws and city
ordinances are faithfully enforced. He
found certain laws and ordinances entirely
ignored, or enforced ftfully and capri
ciously, in a manner to invite corruption. if
not designed for dishonest purposes There
upon he notified the responsible officers,
the Police Commissioners, of the fact, and
informed them of his readiness to hear
what they might have to say on the
subject. 1t was entirely unnecessary
and out of place to allow the Commissioners
to introduce testimony pretending to show
that the duties which the Mayor knew Of
his official knowledge to have been grossly
neglected or improperly and imperfectly
discharged had been faithfully performed.
II the Mayor had been compelled to give the
accused officials a trial, which he was not
required to do, then the hearing would not
be complete or satisfactory without the pro-
ductlon Of testimony on the other side, and
for every single friendly witness and con-
venient subordinate who was ready to offer
the opinion that the Police Commissioners
are efficient and faithful, one hundred
would have been prepared to testify that
their duties are shamefully neglected, to
the damage and danger of the public in
terests. The Mayor cannot honestly aban-
don his determination to remove the Com


missioners for inetiiciency and unfaithful-
ness without at least carrying the investi-