Year: 1877

In O recent interview with correspond
ent of a London journal General Grant
drew comparison between the government
of English cities and of American cities not
very favorable to the latter. "Here in
London, said he, ''you have Lord Mayor,
who is chosen from the Board of Aldermen
in his turn, and the Aldermen are men who
take an interest in the welfare of their city.
(Here General Grant went over the frame
work of the city government with great ac-
curacy) What contrast all this presents
to the state of affairs in New York There
money raised by taxation has been stolen
by Wholesale, and now property will not
sell for the value of the mortgages that are
on it, and declare do not see what is to
become of the city. The debt is enormous.
See how we'll the paving and lighting are
looked after here, and how carefully the
traffic is managed. The police, too, seem
to be excellent And yet they have quite
as 'hard' set to do with as the police OF
New York, and good many more Of them"


The criticism is just. But in London
there are no political parties struggling
over yearly election of Aldermen, a bien-
nial election of Mayor, and intriguing and
combining every year and ut all seasons to
secure appointments as heads of depart
ments. The English metropolis does not
enjoy the glorious privileges of universal
suffrage and the ballot in selecting its chief
executive officer and it's Common Council.
Neither can it boast Tammany Hall stand
ing behind its municipal officials and direct
ing their public acts New York is bur-
dened with debt hampered with taxation,
has miserably paved and dirty streets, an
inefficient police and such artificial plague
spots as the Harlem flats, simply because
the city government is a government of the
politicians, by the politicians and for the
politicians. London has rapid transit
throughout her length and breadth, be-
cause when steam transportation was found
to be public necessity it was secured at
once, and no person stopped to consider
how the interests of the omnibus lines, the
cab companies or any other rival modes Of
transportation would be affected by
it. New York has no rapid transit;
because the horse car corporations
have sufficient political and financial
influence to prevent it. London has ad-
mirably paved and clean streets because
the work Of paving, repairing and cleaning
is done in a business-like, efficient manner
when it is needed. Before the pavements
of New York can be improved the work
must be authorized by the Common
Council, even if an appropriation for
the purpose has been secured. The
Aldermen refuse to pass the necessary
ordinances unless the Commissioner of
Public Works will consent to use some
worthless pavement in which they have an
interest, or to employ by day work such
'.laborers" on the job as they choose to des-
ignate. So the streets Of New York remain
in a condition described by Mr.. Walter of
the London Times, as worse than those
of Constantinople. New York reeks with
filth because the street cleaning money is
squandered on gangs Of idle rascals who are
appointed at the bidding of the politicians
and who neglect all work except that Of
drawing their pay.


There is no reason why New York should
not be as we'll paved, as we'll cleaned, as
we'll policed and as economically governed
as London. But to accomplish this the
government must be taken out Of the hands
of the politicians and brought up to the
lamented Lincoln's standard of govern
ment of the people, by the people and for
the people.