Year: 1874




Governor Dix will no doubt examine fairly
and dispassionatsly the charges Of Official mis-
conduct made against Mayor Havemeyer, and
his final decision will be uninHuenced by any
considerations except those of duty. 'The
power Of removal is q high prerogative," says
the Governor, ''and ought not to be exercised
but FOR grave causes" Persons may disap-
prove OF the Mayors conduct, may be dissat-
isfed with his appointments, may regard him
as stupid, self-willed, easily gulled by design
ing men and utterly incompetent to fill the
Office ne holds; but these opinions are not
sufficient ground for his removal The an
swer to them Is that the people should have
been satisfied as to his capacity before they
elected him, and that there may be differ
snoe OF opinion as to his appointments. His
appOintees and their immediate friends, at
least, would regard them as unexceptionable.
The Mayor might produce quite an army of
indorsers, who would be ready to JUS
tify him on all these points. Sternbach,
who furnishes dry goods to his brothers
tather-in-law, Commissioner Stern; the
Mayors son, who sells tea to the Department
of Charities and Correction; his other son,
who helps to swell the list of Park engineers;
his son-in-law, who supplies butter to the
butchers, milkmen, coal merchants, contrac-
tors and clerks who make a living or realize
profits out Of the departments would doubt
less testify to the capacity, honesty and ex-
cellent qualities of the Mayor. So would
Matsell, Charlick, Gardner and host of his
blessing The mere popular contempt for
Mr.. Havemeyer ought not to occasion his re-
mOval, and if his ignorance, obstinacy and
blunders were all the charges brought against
him we might consider the Governors de-
cision as certain, however gratfied the people
OF New York might be to see the present
Mayoralty term shortened even by single
month.


But there are official misdeeds of which the
Governor is bound to take cognizance, and
which he cannot overlook without evasion Of
the duties he is sworn to faithfully perform.
The "high prerogative" OF removal is placed
in his hands for the protection of the people.
If the Mayor of New York wilfully violates
the law, or if he does acts in defiance Of law,
against the interests of the people, dangerous
to the public peace and security, and calcu-
lated to bring scandal and disgrace upon the
city, there is ''grave cause" for his removal,
and the Governor becomes an accompice in
the offences if he fails to exercise the ''high
prerogative" accorded to him by the law.
The present charges against Mr.. Havemeyer
are that, in the reappointment of Gardner
and Charlick as Commissioners of Police after
they had been stripped of their Offices by the
penalty Of the law, he committed such an act
of official misconduct The fact that he
sought to fortify himself in his wrongdoing by
so-called legal opinion; that he ordered
that opinion in advance of the pretended
resignation of the convicted Commissioners
that he resorted to the unbecoming trick of
shifting each appointee into the place pre-
viously held by the other, is only corrobora-
tive testimony that he knew the llegality of
his action and was endeavoring to evade the
punishment due to his offence. The result
proved the dangerous character of his act
The Police Board, before broken and inhar-
monious, became SO utterly demonlized
through the attempt of the Mayor to force the
two convicted Commissioners back into their
old positions of Treasurer and President that
the discipline of the force and the public
peace were sorely jeopardized. The scandal
GUS appointments were the more reprehen-
sible and lawless since other indictments for
violations Of their oath Of Office were hanging
over the heads of the convicted Commits
sioners, and the clear provision of the charter
the city government.


The pretence that the action Of the Mayor
was excusable because the prosecution of the
Police Commissioners was pressed by in
terested political adventurers is as shallow as
it is dangerous To admit such plea would
be to defeat justice forever. Tweed's prison
doors might be opened on the same grounds,
and the Governors pardon might be claimed
for Ingersoll and his associate The
conviction of Charlick and Gardner
after a fair trial pushed into the
background the motives that had caused their
indictment. The offence of which they were
found guilty was an offence against the whole
people. There can at least be no partsanship
in the demand for the removal of the Mayor,
as his successor would be Alderman Vance,
stanch and consistent republican. Besides,
there are other charges against the Mayor in
volving gross violations of the law, and these
will be likely to be pressed if on
any technical ground he should escape
removal on the present charges. Whatever
decision the Governor may reach it is certain
that he will not be deferred from doing JUS
tice to the people by the plea used in some
quarters of the dangerous character of the
precedent the removal of the Mayor would
establish. The law provides for the removal
of an unfaithful and mischievous Mayor, and