Year: 1878

Corporation Counsel suggests the whoie subject OF
spring municipal elections. 'On this subject" says
an authority among the foremost lit is conceded by
many that the separation Of municipal from general
political contests il extremely desirable. With hut
one election year municipal affairs get but little
public attention except i'll of years and 1t the fact
that this year but State officer voted for-and
htat judgethat permitted the concentration OF
the popular mind upon the county ticket. This fact
seems almost to answer the argument that people,
especially the best people. would not take sufficient
interest in strictly municipal contest at spring
election. The hard times have aroused in the popular
mind interest in questions of taxation greater than
was ever before exhibited, and the HERALD pointed
out three days before election caused general re-
azing OF the fact that our principal burdens
municipal ones. Having been educated up to this
point good and sponsible citizens would be quite as
likely to out, to register and to vote, ut spring
municipal at fall general elections


Nevertheless there remains against the scheme of
spring elections the strong argument OF the great
expense they would involve and the damage to be
caused by the diversion of the minds of people from
their private business affairs. Democratic partisans
urge the objection, too, that separation OF general
and municipal elections would decrease the party
ertions of candidates for local Offices such Alder
men, have great effect in bringing to the polls voters
who support the entire ticket"


z. THE BOARD OF APpoRTIONMENT.


In regard to the Board Of Apportionment and pos
sible attempt interfere with it's powers, the
stitntonaty Of tho Board has been strongly attacked
in case now pending before the General Term Of the
Supreme Court OF this department-that OF Town
send rustee) against the Mayor in which tits argued
that tho power for levying taxes for local
purposes cannot be delegated at the pleasure
of the Legislature to any board of officials.
and county Of New York otherwise than by
the Mayor, Aldermen and Commonalty, in Common
Council convened Mr.. Townsend contends that the
expenses of city government mnst by the constitu-
ton be provided for in every county in the State by
the action Of the Supervisors that the consolidation
OF Board Of Super with the Board of Alder
men, and the merging of the county with the city in
the of New York. does not alter the application
of this constitutional provision; that the vesting IN
the Board Of Apportionnent. partially composed Of
appointed officers. OF the power 10 levy taxes in
secrecy and without appeal, is gross violation not
only of the present constitution OF the State but Of
the fundamental principles upon which our whole
civil poity rests; that there is warrant for cloth
ing partially appointed Board with Legislative
powers. Mr.. Townsend further argues that If it be
permissible for the Legislature TO delegate the tax
levying power TO Board consisting OF four per-
SONS, II is equally permissible to delegate
such power to one person, and in that
manner constitute absolute despot. Further.
that the people have vested all their taxing
of that power q warrant must be shown that while
the constitution not only permits but commands
delegation to boards of supervisors, it contains
where any warrant for deecatng tax levying author
ity to any other persons person. He says:-'.The
Board of Estimate and Apportionment, AZ it now ex-
ists il the elimination Of gradual development of
a vicious Of legislation, consisting OF tempo
sion personal government; it may be the best il
the persons good, but 1t may be the worst and
will IL continued prove TO be the worst government
ever established in any community"