The New York Herald Newspaper, March 20, 1879, Page 3

a “ —— NEW YORK HERALD, THURSDAY, MARCH 20, .1879.—TRIPLF SHEET. ° DEFIANT COMMISSIONERS —_—-—_—_ Messrs. Erhardt, Smith and Nichols Refass to Answer Mayor Cooper Orally. | WRITTEN REPLIES TENDERED Extraordinary Scenes in the mxecutive Chamber. POLICE AID INVOKED The Yayor Declines to Hear the Commissioners ‘ ' Through Their Counsel, INDIGNANT LAWYERS Accusations of Negligence and Inefficiency Denied Altogether ° WHERE WILL THE LIGHTNING STRIKE? At half-past elevon A. M. yesterday Mayor Cooper's pffice contained only half adozen persons, They were mostly clerks and attachés of the Executive ‘Department, and were *busily engaged in arranging ‘flesks and tables for tho convenience of members of the press and for the accommodation of the three members of the Police Board—Messrs, Smith, Nichols and Ethardt—sgainst whom His Honor on the 14th inst. preferred charges of ineffieiency. ‘Mr. Cooper was in his private room examining speci- | Gcation’ that he had prepared in reference to the condition of the streets of this city prior to March 12. ‘These specifications ‘were compiled mainly through #he medium and by the aid of the Heratp “Com- plaint Book,” and laid bare in the most marked man- nor the exact state of the thoroughfares which had been inspected. x When the hands on the large and quaint-looking fimepiece in tho Mayor's office ‘neared the hour of noon Colonel Tracy emerged from his chief’s inner | sanctum carrying in his arms large bundles of the documentary evidence that had been collated by His Honor. Close upon Mr. Tracy’s heels walked Secre- tary Morrison, accompanied by Corporation Counsel William C. Whitney and Mayor Cooper himeclf. While this was going on, and justas the hour of twelve was réached, President Smith, with his coun- sel, Messrs. Willard Bartlett and T. C. E. Ecclesine, entered the chamber. Commissioner Nich- ols’ arrival soon followed, and the entire party, together with Messrs. Aaron J. Vanderpoel and John D. Townsend, who appeared as counsel for Mr. Nichols, ranged themselves about a green’ baize covered table directly opposite the Mayor's official chair. The table was placed near the open grate firo, but'the heat was partially shut off by a screen. Com- missioner Nichols sat at the head of the table. On his right were Mr. Ecclesine, Commissioner Smith and Mr. Bartlett, in the order named. On the left, ee their backs toward the reporters’ table, were - Towngend and Mr. Vanderpoel. General Smith to be troubled. At his entrance he glanced at His Honor, but the latter did not appear to recog- ftiize him. A small table was provided for two atenographers. * The Mayor displayed that nerveusness of manner which is habituel with him, and took.off his eye- Qlesses snd put them on agains dozen times in quick succession, as he is ‘accustomed to do when in earnest conversation or serious thought. Each and everyact of this kind was proceded by His Honor’s -spparently futile attempt to put in order the mass of papers that wore scattered. about his desk. Pigeon holes were actually stufféd with documents ‘and at the foot of tho Chic? Magistrate fay a printed Fecord of the trial of the Commissioners before ex- Mayor Ely. By thts time the chamber had become crowded to suffocation. Politicians of every politi- cal stripe and character were present. Among these vere Aldermen Sauer, Hyatt and Cavanagh, ex-Com- missioner of Accounts Lindsay I. Howe, Superin- tendent George W. Walling, John Franz (a candidate for the office of Police Commissioner), Coroner Flan- agan, Judge Callahan, Thomas Costigan, Supervisor of the City Record, and a number of others, THE BALL ROLLING. * Mayor Cooper before qpening the proceedings held .# short consultation with Corporation Counsel Whit- ney and his private secretary, Mr. Morrison. When the talk had ended His Honor looked around on his sudience and smilingly asked if all the accused Com- missioners were present. A glance showed that Mr. Erhardt had not yet arrived, aud he said, ‘I will wait a few moments to seo if he will appear bofore | com- mence the hearing.” At this point Mr. Erharjt, with his counsel, Mr. Elibu Root, entered the office, and the former, plac- ing his hat on a bookcase, seated himself in front of President Smith, but immediately changed his seat to onebehind him. The cause of the chango was ap- parently's desire on the part of Mr. Erhardt to got away furtner from the fire, and Mayor Cooper, notic- ing this, arose at once and placed the screen between the Commissioner's chair and the grate. Then Mr. Erhardt stood up and walked still further back, “Haven't you got.a chair?” asked His Honor. “I ptefer to stand,” réturned the Comm! bowing, and the cxamination was then begun. ioner, Mayor -Cooper—You received a letter from me, Mr. Erhardt, - copy of which I hold in my band, March 14, Mr. Erhardt—I did. Mayor Cooper—I sent you that letter under a pro- vision of the charter the terms of which you aro doubtless familiar: I am now ready to hear what you have to say regarding its contents or the charges contained therein. Mr, Erhardt—I am ready to The Commissioner then the following: fn the matter of the charges proferred by on. Edward Cooper, 7 0 city of New York, against Joel B, ve of the city’ ot New York :— rs he Ln and Coed red ent oval mm the notice served upon hita, dated Mareh 1% bis lated March 14, 187, and respectfully represents to ld Mayor — That the term of offico of tho ani B. Erhardt as Police Commissioner of the city of New York, for which he ‘appointes 10th day at April, 1877, except that id Brharat haying deen appoin' mtinnes to hold office rovided, nnd. hns over since the said 10th day'of continued to discharge duties of such office holding the same until his sneves ind he submits that he cannot except by Pointment of ceossor's co we qualitication tt He, jeation thereon, Wie and sue! 0 ene f Aldermen of the city of New York aud fore he says thi York has no jurisdiction, power of authorit eeeding or to remove him, the said Joo! B. Erhardt, from Office without the concurrence of the Board of Aldermen. : JOKL B. ERHARDT, Police Commission ANOTHER ANSWER. His Honor listened attentively to #he reading of the ment and when it was finished he overruled the objections to his jurisdictions contained therein and wai ‘IT will now take the charges seriatim, ond for this purpose'l will hear anything further that the Commissioner tay desire to say.” “I desire, then,” said Mr. Erhardt, “inasmuch as you have overruled my objections, to read another answer to the charges. Mr. Erhardt then read as follows :— In tho matter of tho gharges preferred by Hon. Edward oper t of tho city of Now York, against Joel riardt, Police Commissioner of the city of New the Mayor of the city of Now in this pro- vs contained In the said notice oF paper oF writing. served upon him ax eontatnin Or statement of cates warranting hist eral, indefinite, vaxue and w w from the said paper what apacitic bets or omixsions aro Intended thereby ‘tu bo allowed. ae cause for his te 1 Q moval Wherefore to says that there is not given to him a su. clont statement of charges or matters alleged as cause for his removal, oF any knowledge of tho causes which in the upinion of the said Mayor, may warrant hig removal {rom office, or any Knuwledue of the causes upon which wn opportunity te be board agai: meh removal within the irae intent nd meaning of the suntutes im wach Cane mado rovided. ond The said Joel B. Erhardt ronpeettully roan Mayor shail designate ur specity with roga a argos respectively — + mronspu ‘Rots OF vuission to act on the part of offen aro #0 it te impos: the said Erhardt the said Mayor ct tributed to produceor to have constitu constitute laxity or incapability in the government and dfsciptine uf the police force ur the deterioration or de- liration to whlch he refors inthe first charge con ani the sald Erhardt has omitted todo, which he in his place could have done to cause or help to cause the streets of the city to be or te be kept more thor- oughly cleaned, or the ashes, dirt, rubbish rb bo more frequently or completely removed from y- 4. In tho discharge of what public duties the said Erhardt bas been negligent. and what he should have done in respect thereto that he has not done. 4. In what respect the said Erhardt has allowed personal Cisseneinie to preclude the proper exorcise of any official rust. 5, In what respect the said Erbardt's conduct has been unbecoming his office. JOEL B. ERHARDT, Police Commissioner. EXAMINING MMR, ERHARDT. Mayor Cooper then began a searching examination of the Commissioner. ~ “How long have you been s Police Commissioner?” asked His Honor. Mr. Erhardt—Since December, 1875; I was ap- pointed in that year I believe. Mayor Cooper—With reference ‘to the first charge contained in my communication to the effect that the Police Board of which you are a member has been guilty of inefficiency? Mr. Erhardt—I have a written reply. which is now being copied and which will, I think, contain answers to all questions of that character, ‘or Cooper—Is the charge touching the laxity and demoralization:in the police force true? Mr, Erhardt—I stated, Mr. Mayor, that I had an answer prepared and that it would be here shortly. Mayor Cooper—Have you got it with you? Mr. Erhardt—I expect it here in a very short time. Mayor Cooper-‘Then we will await its arrival. But, pending that, I would like to ask a few ques: tions. Js the allegation to the effect that the streets have not been ¢! and the ashes, rubbish and garbage not removed as often as necessary true? Mr, Erhardt—I would ask what answer Your Honor makes to my question which I asked about turnish- ing me with specificat.ons of the charges made against me. Mayor Cooper—I decline to answer any question. If you have any answers to make to my questions you can do ao. I will be very glad to hear them. Mr. Erhardt—I would like my question to be an- swered. + Mayor Cooper—I wish to put some questions to you, and want a reply—yea or nay. . Mr. Erhardt steadily declined to answer, and the Mayor proceeded to consider General Smith's case. AN EXTRAORDINARY SCENE. Dosing. ue progress of President Smith’s examt- nation the wildest confusion at one time prevailed. Everybody in the, Mayor's Office was thunderstruck ‘at the novelty of the scene, which was occasioned b; an attempt on the part of Mr. Willard Bartlett ani Mr. Ecclesine to read the General’s answer on his behalf. The matter was oppored by Mr. Cooper, say- ing ina mild tone of voice, ‘‘Now I will hear what -General-Smith has to ssy. _I understand Mr. Erhardt desires to put in a written argument.” Mr. Bartlett was instantly on his feet..In one hand he hold a voluminous document, while the -other nervously elutched a letter from his ct: “fT “appear on behalf of General Smith, counsel, addressing the Mayor. 3 “I will not hear you, Mr. Bartlett,” replied the Mayor; ‘I addressed my remarks to. General Smithy a oe from hjm cere an becouse rd aguin ask you, General Smith, if you have an; to say in relation to these charges?" = “He has something to sa} Stay said Mr. Bart-,| aa he proposes to sey it through me, his oa Meroe Coches (angrily)—I will not hear you, sir. oe General Smith to answer the question him- self. y Mr. Bartlett—I appear as his counsel, and he de- sires me to make for him to you a statement in re- Jation to these charges. “J will not hear you,” said the Mayof, deter- minedly. OBSTINATE COUNSEL, “But, I tell you, you will hear me,”’ said the coun- to bave con. ‘or to have helped the with the yovei sellor. ‘he law under which you act declares that ahearfng shall be afforded to the accused, It docs not specify throngh whom the hearing shall be had. It is one of the most precious rights in the hands of Saeras to be heard hy counsel, and I propose to—— or Cooper (interrupting)—Mr. rtlett, stop, fac I decline to hear you. If General Smith has nothing to say then xe il close the case. At this point Mr. lett proceeded to read Gen- eral Smith's defence Mayor Cooper rapped for order in vain. He cried out “Stop, stop!” but the lawyer wont on reading, Not appearing to mind His Honor in the least. “I wish you to desist, Mr. Bartlett,” at last shouted “I will not desist,” was the angry retort. “Then I will be obliged to put you out of my office.”” . His Honorfelt for the electric bell that connects his office with the Twenty-sixth precinct station and tapped it lightly. Sergeant Conlin promptly ‘re- *rStop that. man, officer,” said Mr. Cooper, ex- citediy, as he pointed to the slender form of Mr. Tho int went up tothe lawyer and tugged at at seove, but the his co reading was still kept up in 8 deep, resonant tone of voice. “Stop him!" again shouted the Mayor; and this time Mr. Bartlett bap and turned the paper over to Mr. Ecclesino, who continued the reading.’ ‘Tho Mayor ordered the cant to put a stop to the Senator, but tho'latter ‘around, and, 100k. ‘ing squarely into the officer's eyes, said, in-a defiant manner— “You doren’t do it, sir; I am an officer of the Su- preme Court, and am in the exercise of my functions ‘as the deforider of a client and I will not stop.” The eant ped to His Honor’s chair for further orders, while Mr. Ecclesine continued read- ing. The Mayor again threatened to put both Mr, Bartlett and Mr. Ecclesine out of the office, but still the reading went on. At one time Sergeant Conlin ‘went up to the Senator and told him to go out, and Mr, Ecclosine thereupon gave the letter that ho was reading to his colleague. “Where did you leave off?” said the latter, as cool as could be, and the reading was proceeded with. In vain the Mayor tried to put a stup to the action of General Smith’s counsel. The entire assemblage was in an uproar. Everybody in the room looked at one another in bewilderment. Such ascene had never been witnessed before, and utter astonishment was depicted on everybody's counte- At last the letter was finished, and as the “William F, Smith, Police Commissioner,” were pronounced, the two counsellors sat down and smiled at the astounded Mayor. Corporation Coun-, sel Whitney, who sat next His Honor, leaned over and held ort consultation with him, after which the May jain asked General Smith if he had any answer to muke to the charges. Mr. Bartlett—He has this answer to make which I hold in my hand and which read. I hand you this communication on President Smith’s behalt. Mayor Cooper—I deciine to receive it from you. Mr. Bartlett (handing the letter to Commissioner Smith)—Here, Smith, hand this tome, Now . will you accept it? Mayor Cooper—Is it signed by General Smith? Mr. Bartlett—You en see for yourself by opening it. And then, after a pause, the lawyer added, “It is signed by him.’ " ¢ Mayor took the paper, and examined it. Mr. Whitney went over to Mr. Bartlett and talked with him for a few moments. Then Mr. Whitney con- versed with Mayor Cooper, who immediately after- ward said:— . “General Smith, you are here. Havo you anything to say further in relation to the&e charges?” General Smith (after consultation with his coun- scl)—You have my answer in writing. Mayor Cooper—Do I understand you to .deny that the police force has become demoralized? General Smith—I have made my answer in writing. Mayor Cooper—Do you wish to make any other statement? General Smith—I have already given my answer, rer Cooper—Have you any iurther angwer to make? B ty PET ode General Smith—I desire to be heard through counsel. This unvgrying answer was returned to all subse- quent questions of the f° General Smith was ecu ¢ had been # Police Commissioner; whether or not he was president of the Board, but the only answer returned was the stereotyped one of, “1 desire to be heard through counsel.” » The (whole catalogue of Mayor Cooper's charges ‘were gone into, but no denial or affirmation could be secured, 7 A DOMBSHELL. Then the Mayor took from his desk a bundle of papers, and, looking a¢ General Smith and his coun- satd:— “The Mayor will say that he knows of his own por- sonal knowledge that thd streets of this city have not been kept in proper condition. They are not clean, and he is prepared to provo tiiafact. I would like to know whether General Smith desires to mako any answer to this question, Are you familiar with the condition of Greenwich street from the Battery to her ar street on the Jd of March in the present year?” - General Smith—I cannot answer any questions un- legs you allow me tho right to appear by counsel. layor Ci r-—I will ask General Smith if thatis all the rept ‘wishes to make? ir. Bartlett—! has something to say through his counsel. . Mayor Cooper—I decline to hear you, Mr. Bartlett, and Lnow give notice that I do not intend to hear coungel in any shape, manner or form, I receive tho gommunication from General Smith through Mr. Bartlett. If any further evidence is to be given it can be handed in in writing within the next twen- ty-four hours. The case of General Smith is now closed. GENERAL SMITH'S ANSWER. The following is the eg <, General Smith :— ew Ye inst, T make the following < Bo far ax Lam concerned it is not true that the govorn- ment and discipline of the police force have become lax or incapablg under the Board of Police of which I am a mem: ber, It is not true that the police force has deteriorated in it has become domoralived. rn ‘ar as Lam concerned, that the Board of f which Tam. a momber, has omitted to perforne oF propery to oxercine any authority lupe t Uy law in rospect to cleaning the s f Now York, « rue that Ehavd been noxligent in the discharge Iris of the publie duties which I was honnd to fulfil, It is not true that I have allowed personal dissonsions to the proper exercise of tho official trust whieh I Assumed. It is not true that my conduct has beon unbecoming my ome. wertions matte in your letter, so far as th mo, have no foundation i fact; and therefore di cannes Inwtulty, tithte the cause for remo’ em: Inted by the statute. No wet or omisston ty Mle ec {nO particntars are stint pv Hine, pimen vor. Ae, “cumstances, eo os to ouablo mo to rofute them, and without ifeations or proof to supply, information, on these it is impossible to controvert your assertions except as T have now done. If they aro made more specific T can make my deniat more, specific. If yeu confront mo ‘any proof to sustain’ them T ‘overthrow. it by counter proof. But until’ you, specify the pa tieular nud cirenmstances on which you base y conclusions and upon which you have seen fit to announce a Judgment before « hearing, you do not afford me the oppor. at oppor- tunity to ve heard wh @ Inw prescribes. unity Tdemand as a ter of right. ny proceeding on your part lookin, xcept upon specific allegations of the canse Ishall bave an opportunity to.cont: evidence which T shall ha T have in all things conscienti« y and I feet that [ have in all things done my duty as a Police Commissioner and member of the Board of Police of the city of New York, Yours respocttully, Ki WILLIAM F. SMITIT. ANOTHER ANSWER FROM MR. ERHARDT. Here the following communication was handed to the Mayor, who read it through carefully :— Jn, tho mattor of the chargos preferred, by Hon. rot the city of New Yi ‘alice Commissioner of the city 01 art aw Edward Joel B. ‘the government and discipline of the polis become Inx a ble, the police force pralized; that the persons known as Police missioners of the city of New York, aud that the respond- ent has aud has had no authority or power, no relation to ‘als of the is meeting of ower and rity as have been couferred wy y of the said Board of Police; that as x mem! Hoard of Police, and in the exercise of” all por thorities conferred. upon him py such Board, this respond- ont ns faithfully and fully performed his ‘duty and has mavle overy endeavor and used all proper means to prevent ment and discipline of the police force from be- coming lax or incapable, nnd to prevent the wud fo deteriorating in efliciency.or. becoming demoralized, and to secure roform and improvement in these respects: and denies yny statement, inference or implicdtion to the con- trary in the said charges contained. ‘Sermd—That the many and varied duties imposed by Jaw upon tho Board of. Police bas required w distribution of labor among the mombors of the Board, and ithas there- fore always been the custom of the Board of Police, and, as this rospondent is informed and belioves, was the intent of Jaw, in constituting a Board composed of four members fo nusifn to particular, members of the Board either in- dividnally or organized in committees, particular branches of dnay to be performed under. the general supervision of the Hoard; that tho duties of cleaning the strocts and ro- moving the ashes, rubbish, dirt and garbayo from the city has beon ever since long pricr to this respondent's ap- pointment to office assigned to u committed of the ard tho. manner and for the reasons afore- uid; * the said committee. has been com- this respondent became a mem- or - sine: e the Board of of ull the other members of the Board, and spondont hay-never been a member thereof until within the past [ow weeks. That as @ member of the ssid Board of Police, and in the exer. civo of all the powers conferred upoh him Wy the suid Bonrd in relation to the cleaning of the strocts 0 and the removal of nal irt, rubbish au: 9 faithful} and'fuily performed hix duties, wtatement, interence or implicatten to ondent farther says that the polico de- city of Now York has for its head a Board consisting of four porvond, known as Folice Comulestonors gf the ofty of Now York; that the sail Commissioners are William F. Smith, DowlttC. Wheeler, Sidney P. Nichols and Joel B. Erhardt, and that the first two charges con- tained in the’ written papor served upon him asa state- ment of cauyes for his removal from office—to wit, tho aries reg cing the Kovernment and discipline of the police force, charges regarding the cleaatng of the atreote of thie city of New York find the removal of ashos, rt, rabbish and garbage therefrom—aro charges agelust tho Board of Police of tho city of Now York, and that the Mayor has no jurisdiction, power or authority to removo this respondent from office upon tho said chargos connection with all the other members of the ‘and upow cause shown it the said Board body in, & proceeding wheroin the sald Board as a body has an op- portunity to be heard. . Fourth—This respondent denies that he has been peaiizent In the discharge of any public duties which he was ‘bound to. 5 Fifth—He donies that he hi to preeinde the proper ho has axsume: pSizth—He denies that his conduct has been unbecoming 8 office, Serenth—Hie denies that any cause exists warranting his removal from oltice. JORL B. ERHARDT, allowed personal digsensions of any oficial trust which PolicaCommissionor. ‘MR. NICHOLS’ CASE, “ Tho Mayor, after laying aside the letter of Mr. Er- hardt, preceeded to examine Mr. Nichols. Warned by the fate of General Smith’s counsel the legal ad- visers of Mr. Nichols did not attempt to create a scene by objecting to the course adopted by His Honor. The investigation was proceeded with in the following-manner :— Mayor Cooper—Did you receive my communica- tion of the 14th inst.? ¥ Mr. Nichols—I did, sir. Mayor Ct -—Then, I will now give you an op- portunity to be heard in relation thereto. . Mr, Nicholsa—I would like to ask you whether! my be permitted to be hear’ through counsel. layor Cooper—No, sir. ¥ Mr. Nichols—What I have to state I have reduced to writing, and I am p: to submit it. I protest against your action outrage on my rights. Will you accept of this communication trom my counsel? i Mayor Cooper—No, sir. Mr. Nichols—Not if he acts as my"agent ? ‘Tho Mayor ditt not answer this quéstion, being at the time engaged in conversation with Corporation following letter wae handed ¥ y Michele through his counsel: — rs 5e she Heo. Epwanrp Coorer, Mayor of tife city of New As one of the Polico Commissioners of the city of New York T appear in response to the commanteation fram you, livered to me en tho Lath inet. citing mo to appear be: fore you on the 19th day of 1970, at twelve o'clock, noon, and in reference to the jon :— Firt—I respectfully protest that tho charter of the city secures w me a right to be heard beforwit is adjud, that there is cause for my removal, wad that th ¢ haw been violated in that yo by of the notice worv have stated your conclusions and xdjndgod on me, that they warrant tunit; vider y removal from office before an had Tas beon accorded me of.euch a hearing asic pro: for in the charter. : ond—The paper or notice served epon as contain- ros against ine and being the only statement of ir alloged charges, recei' by 8 general, in- nd uncertain, It is impossible or notice what specific act: or omissions T therefore say there is not. given me a sufelent statement of charges or matters alleged as cause tor my removal, nor proper opportunity to hear the Proats, if any there may be, thereon, 7 id paper or notice I presal th right to take and wave uncertainty and inauicioncy of said p statement of charges against me, and al want of jurisdiction in the matter, and I only furth: 5 apond in order that Your Honur may be apprise ot. tho therein fully deny each and every concinsi: of Pol of which I am amember ¢ and discipline of police force have become or that the police force has deteriorated in efficiency or that it come demoralized. I ¢: that the Board has, or that I asa member thereof li failed or omitted to deo or perform any duty imposed npon me or it by law in respect to clowning the streets or removing from the ¢! shes, dirt.rubbish or garbage, On the other ti timos since I have been such C oner all the moneys taken from the public treasury. ed for street cleaning purposos have been properly sppliod vw such purpose, and the Hoard. has ischarged its whole duty in the premises, I ent in the di he explicit I been negli isch of r eh Iwas bound Yo full. Tacky that t have allowed personal dissensions to precinde the proper exercise of tho efiicial trust which I assumed. I deny that my conduct haw been unbecoming my office, I deny-that T hve done any net or omitted any duty which would war- rant or justify Your Honor in re of Police Cominissioner. Respect submitted. New You; March 19,1878. SIDNEY P. NICHOLS. ANOTHER STEREOTYPED ANSWER, The examination of Mr. Nichols was then con- tinued, but to every question the following reply was invariably given:—‘‘It the Mayor will turnish me with the specifications of the charges he holds, if any, agaigst me, and will give me @ reasonable time by to bepetome Ere gps Koeh egper yh BD is Honor at last emi at -repeated,rop!; which was dictated, by the Commissioner’: counsel, and put the following questions to Mr. Nichols, ali of which were answer im the same lang! » with the exception that at one time Mr. Nichols ly inquired whether the Mayor, wished to be cross-ex- send iti relation’ to the. specifications which he eld: , Mayor Cooper—On March 12, and priot to that date, are you ucgnainted with the condition iol sirens, OR Murray rte the Bocwdee: street, Saye ee fave Foy other answer fess Mr..Nichole—If the rn bd will furnish me, &c, Mayor Cooper—I visited a good meny other places, among them West - Thirty-second street. Lo you know anything about the condition of that street? Mr. Nichols—It the Mayor will furnish me, &c, ae Cooper—Do you wish to make any other answer But Mr. Nichols did not. The same old string of words wore rolled out to every subsequent question. One of these related to whether or not Mr, Erhardt had in 1877 informed Mr. Nichols that men employed in the Street Cleaning Bureau were idling away their time. This question remained unanswered for near] ten minutes. Mr. Townnend, Mr. Nichols and Mr. Vanderpoel eagerly perused a large book that had been unwrapped trom the folds of a large shect of brown paper. The Mayor at last became impatient. “Have you any auswer to make?" said he, finally, Mr. Nichols—I would like to ask whether that % in my case oF in the case of Mr. Erhardt ? Mayor Cooper—Answer the question; I put it to you. Mr. Nichols—-I am and have boen at all times roady and willing to give the Mayor full information upon every subject connected with the Police Department or its operations. But itis improper for me in a proceeding in Which I am denied the right of coun- Sel and havo not boen furnished with any charges or specifications to make answers which would seem to recognize in any way the regularity of the papceed- ings against me. long list of questions was then put by His Honor, but to cach and every one of them the fore- oing Answer was returned. The Mayor announced ready and willing to go into specifications of charges then and there, but the same answer was returned to every attempt of this character made by His Honor. Mr. Nichols was requested to stato whether the streets wore or had been in good con- dition; whether or not the money intrusted to him had been properly expended; whether Greenwich street, Washi; were in good beginning, invariably returned in reply. GOVERNOR TILDEN’S LETTER, ner Nichols then took a pamphlet from i began reading extracts trom a letter of Governor Tilden to Mayor Wickham, dated February 17, 1875, He was commanded to stop by the Mayor, but by advice of couneel continued, The toes A qurned to Mr. Whitney, and then said, “Go on, Mr. Nichols.” But by this time it had been decided to submit the extracts in writing. The following are the points: Hemovals for cause ard distinguishable from removals hich are in the arbitrary will of the officer ing me from thi fiz tha powors and which haye.genorally followed + Jn of removing power or of party sscondancy, * * © Council of Apportionmont, under the constitution of 1777, consisting of the Governor and four Senators, lad the a pointwent aud removal at will of nearly all the local o cors of the State, unmbering fifteen thousand, when ation was but one-third of its present magnitude ell became public epprobrium and was ished ‘by “universal ‘conse o 8 which the whole system rest cases must bo for a substantial, reasonable * © The pow oval without obeying the rul conscience of ey mi a disregard of that rule would be none of right and duty. It would be the immoral power to ihe law had not disabled the officer havin . * * 2 Inthe case of the Mayor it wo removal in the manner provided by the *"* T have beon thus explicit in stating my thig subject in order. to illustrate the in of my dissent from a construction of my powers and which would practically convert removal for cause into re- walat arbitrary will, * * * It is, my opinion that th nctionary who ‘initintes 8 removal in such a case should take enre that all important acts and proofs ary in writing and of record. Ido not now discuss the ques the reasons which tho law requi clude the material ficts th f the accused party, ‘tion. Ttis quite clear that every conside and of publ inore enlarged construction to present ul wen where the du for removal is not imposed by law upo ries or bod 0 mhst eonenr in the Before the reading of the extracts Mr. Bartlett and General Smith left the Executive Chamber and did not return, ‘MR. ERHARDT AGAIN UNDER FIRE. Commissioner Erhardt asked *for specifications of the charges made against him. Mayor Cooper declined to give any, but signified his willingness to discnss the matters with which he had made himself acquainted. He began an ex- amination of Mr. Erhardt, taking up item by item the list of charges, and asking after each one, “Is that true, Mr. Erhardt To each question .the Commissioner said he had presented a written document which covered the whole ground. The Commissjoner and his counsel, Mr. Elihu Root, at last got up, and, putting on th¢ir coats, prepared to leave the office. yor Cooper—I wish to ask you some more nestions, Mr. Erhardt. Are the streets kept as clean as they ought to be? Mr, Erhardt—I have somo doubt as to whether furthor answer is needed to any charge that has been made, Iask you whether you are examining me in regard to my case or in reference to the cases of my 0) colleagues ? Mayor Cooper—I ask foradefinite answer. Is it true or untrue? ‘ Mr, Erhardt—In what capacity do you ask the question? Mayor Cooper—I decline to answer the question. ‘Will you affirm or deny my statement? Mr. Erhardt—If Your Honor desires to examine me ‘as 3 witness I would like to be informed of the fact. Mayor Cooper—Did you dn 1877 cause some polico rain oe citizens’ clothes.to watch the street clean- men i ing ibid esis same answer. yor Cooper—! ‘you do anytlring to correct the abuses alleged to cxist in the StreetCleaning Buteau? Mr. Erhardt gave the samo answer. Numerous other questions of a similar purport ‘were put to Mr. Erhardt, but remnined unanswered: Mr. Townsend—May I be permitted to ask if Mi Wheeler is to be examined to-fay?”” . Mayor Cooper—He will not ‘be here to-day. I don’t expect him. ‘Since Mr. it declines to answer any of my questions I declare the case closed. The crowd filed out into the hall and groups of men began to talk about the proceedings. MR, WAITNEY’S OPINION, Before taking measures against the Commissioners the following legal opmion was obtained by the Mayor from Corporation Counsel Whitney :— Law Drrantevr, Orricx or THE Couxset To THK Conroratiox, New York, March 18, 1879. Hon. Epwanp Coorer, Mayor of New Yor! Stk—I have examined-the question submitted by you as to tho nature of tho hoaring provided for by the twonty- fifth section of tho City Charter in caso of the contem- plated removul of heads of depurtioent e ouly pro- ision of uw upon the subject is as foll The hends of all departments, ay above, and all other persons whose appointinent is in this s6e'ion provided for, may be removed by the Mayor for eunse,and after opportunity to be heard, subject, however, before such removal shall tuke effect, to the approval of the Governor expressed in writing. ‘The Mayor shall in all uunicate to the Governor in writing, his.reaso oval. a removal is so effected the Mayor shall, apon the demand of the officer removed, make in writing a public statement of the reasons therefor. Theay are all the provisions of law upon the.sabject. wyatent iy parfly analogous to the provision Of the ition with reference tu the removal of county ofi- the Governor. hose retained cors bi Articte 10, section 1, of the constitution, pr “the Governor may remove any officer: in this section men- tioned within tho term for which he shall have been rovides that elected. xiving to such officer a copy of tho charges against him and an opportunity of being henrd in his defence The difference betwoen the two systems is very ag- nificant. In the case of the removal of county officers by ithe Governor it is provided that’ there shall be charges which shall be given to the officer proceaded against and ho shall have an opportunity, of being heard “in his do- fence.” r the caso of the removal of he Provision requiring charges or the pr rot anything in the nataro of ehar; that the removal shall bo for canye and atter the officer hus had an opportunity of being heard. And. it was clearly in tho mind of the framers of tho.charter that a farmal state- ‘ment of the reasons of the removal might not berg | 4 foro the Mayor bad ated, nad honco the proviso that “whea- ever temoval is up effectod the Mayor shall, apon the de- removed, io 1cofteorensone therefor om \ would be no occasion for this provision ifit had been in contemplation that any public nent of the grounds of romoval would have beon made as tho initial of the proceedings foliowed by anything in the nature axomi-judictal investigation. The other important difference between th m estab: lished for the romoval-of county officers by 1 ‘and that for the removal of ‘heads ot departments is that in ease of removal by the Governor ‘thore are provisions of law for tho takinis of ‘and fora semnifudicial investi- gation of the tru proterred, The provision: tuted, volume 1*, pager 123-4, taken'w , Laws of 1806, provide that the Governor “may” take the testimony himself, or direct the District Attorney of tho’ county to investigate the truth of any “chargox” preferred, with power to subpana BY ‘ota “Tl 3 pointed for the purpose by the Governor, Thero are also provisions for administering oaths, for onforciug obedience to subpernas and making falso swearing perjury. All thexe things are necessary whénever attything in the F'the Mayor of the city and the Jiovernor of the State to act in the cases under the send of official responsibi in each case, and wit it he hands of two snch high officials not <. But for the benetit of the official cally provided P Fird—That ho should not be removed withor portunity ¢ heard” betoro the Mayor tnings supposed by the Mayor to constitute removal. ‘communicate to the Seromd—That the Mayor shail Governor in writing his reasons, tor ich removal.” Jode of procedure for the pur- or there are any goueral pro- 0 pose of uscertaining wh be relied upon ws giving th visions of law which cout Mayor power t ination of wit the attendance of, wit- It authorizes the issu- ‘wherd a judeo, or an ar- rxon, ora board or committee essly anthorised by TI tvon is exprossly an- thorized by law “to hee ® matter.” But when you look tothe sections of the same chapter of the Code which muePbe relied upon for tho authority to administer An oath to a wi he has appeared in answer to a super for perjury in case of false w ewouring, the anth: ong with other persons to admin! in oxth, is limited to these. caves whors Hm omet UF NM jh “reqiniFod Or authorized Dy And there is no provision of law aathorizing the sduitnteteation of. a9 9th ‘Inthe proceedings dofore the nestion of the authority of tho Mayor to ad- the Iaw authorizes an oath to were ofu hin t | fanetions forny to this extent @ magistrate ay by net of the dow more than it docs a notary pab- Hie to erect « sombjydicial tribunal, except im cases where the Legislature hay authorized it, Thers is no provision of law for any such thing. in tho case of tho removal of the head of adepartmont. And I ni satistiod these provisions of tho new Code confer no now power in this regard, bat rofor to 1 Jaw gat any ‘tlme something in rvcceding Is wuthorived. In. all ides the moans for executing the pr . therefore, that (here is no pre for unything in tho nature of @ trial in the case of the con- templated romoval of a head of n department. OF course, at the mere muggestion of such an idos, it at if any sueh thing hind 0 definite provision would have -y asnistanceto the Mayor, either mont of & comminsion rat least some mode of orizing the appoit the testimony coed: img would lave been detinitely provided adequate for the occasion. For if a. trial is to be had it be a fai in such ease the or: 'y bat protract of | investigation wn to etyurts of jasticn cannot well be avoided, if the removal of @ public oft for the purpose, any suel) thin ipto n fireo, ee bel gm body may choose to make it, The removal for cause, which tho Mayor is authorized to make, is not so mach a judicial as an executive act—pot intended to by n arbit KY oxeeutive act, as ix plainl 1 Ve inferred from the pr img “eanse” to be stated, but is evidently 1 1. ns the nbsonce of any provision for a judi y shows, in placing upon ‘the M ity the responsibility yor of of seving that tho laws are unforced, with the end of appointing the main city officials, an them, with the concnrrence of t ‘one cifse, and of the Governor in th consideréd that his responsibility to the pabite se of the community would be the enfegaard against by him of tho power conferres wer to that of removing in And this is what the law intonded to secure, when it was provided that hig act of removal should ba a public one, tor causes apon which the oMcer magt Bo permitted to be writ: reasons which ma vornor and spread the information of the public of which Ke acts, Can, sir, yours r W. ©. WHITNEY, Counsel WHAT MU. JOHN D. TOWNSERD SATS. Mr, John D. Townsend was tound at his office on Broadway later in the day and questioned as to the course he would pursue in behalf of his client, Mr. Nichols. He said he was not prepared just then to say what he would do under the circumstan He in- tended to have a consultation with Mr. Vanderpocl in regard to tho matter, but he declined mabing pons anything concerning his plans before he rought them to bear upon Mayor Cooper. Nb ac- tion at all might be takon by him, and it was difficult to sey how he and his assovinte goupael would deal be trananittod witnesses before a county judge or a comurissioner ap- | nature of ‘a trial of the truth of charges is to be con- with the case. At all ents, nothing definite had as yet been determined on. ‘MR. BARTLETT'S OPINION. “What do you think of Mayor Cooper's refusal to hear you on behalf of General Smith?” Mr. Bartlett was asked lust evening. “I think it was wholiy unjustifiable and at variance with every principle of enlightened administration of the law.’ “Do you regard General Smith's statement as a complete answer to the Mayor's letter of the 14th ‘inst. ?) “Trdgard the answer as one upon which the Mayor yrith a proper sense of is duty would have dismissed the proceeding.” “Do you understand that there is any doubt as to the Mayor’s power to remove in the case of Mr. Erhardt?” “L understand that there an assertion on tho & power existe Erhardt without the confirmation of the Board of Aldermen.”’ “Ist based on the law of 1864?" do not know what law it is based upon and I think the Mayor would find it very difflentt to point it out. ‘The whole proceeding as conducted by the Mayor was charecteristic of a monarchical govern- ment and indicative of an intention in advance to disregard fair procedure. That the case was pre- judged is evident from the statement in the letter of the a that the alleged causes warranted the re- moval.” “Do I understand that the Mayor has given you twenty-four hours to put in an additional answer?’ “The Mayor made a remark which he addressed to the gentlemen present to that effect. Upon my ask- ing him whether that remark was addressed to me and my associate, Mx, Ecclesine, he stated that he did not address us but that the remark was made to General Smith. General Smith had in fact pre- viously le{t the room, after having been told by the Mayor that his case was closed.’” “Do you propose to submit anything more in General Smith’s behalt in writing?” . “I cannot say at the present moment what action I take to-morrow.” ‘Have you ever known an exceutive officer under similar circuinstances to order a policeman to eject counsel?” “I never have, and I venture to say such a case never occurred in this government before.”” “What do you think about the Mayor's course?” “It was undignified and grossly improper, as well at legal. He proceeded iu a manner which shows that he was ntterly unmindful of courtesy or right. My answer on behalf of Police Commissioner Smith ‘was a8 specific as the general character of the Mayor's allegations would admtt.”” fr. Aaron J. Vanderpoel, in answer to a question as to the probable future course of counsel, said:—‘I have nothing whichJ desire to say now. I think it would be indelicate for ne to express my opinion on the subject at this juncture.”’ “I believe,’ the reporter remarked, ‘that the wr has givea you twenty-four hours more in ‘which to submit an answer.” __ “The Mayor,” rqplied Mr, Vanderpoel, “said he would grant twenty-four hours more in which to put in any answer in writing’ wo desired to make. I made no reply and then left the room for the Special ‘Term, where I had an engagement.” “Is Mayor Cooper's power to romove in the case of Mr. Erhardt questioned?” was asked. “Such a claim was made, I believe. based on the law of 1864. I have not examined the law on the sub- ject and have no opinion to express in reference to it. ME. ELIHU ROOT ON THE SITUATION. Mr. Eljhu Root, counsel for Commissioner Er- hardt, was visited at his office,on Broadway, during the afternoon. Mr. Root hesitated about giving any opinion as to what might be dono in the present emergency. “Yon seem to think,” said the reporter, “that the twenty-four hours granted by the Mayor to the Commissioners for further pleading or presentation of views will not alter the situation?” “The communication sent by the Mayor to the Commissioners,” said Mr, Root, “‘gave no informa- tion whatever as to the canses for which the Mayor proposed to remove them. In Mr. Erhardt’s case, tor instance, the Mayor svys the Board has failed in the general performance of duties. He does not say that Mr. Erhardt has failed to do what he ought or has done anything he ought not, except by the general statements—'You have been negligent,’ ‘You have allowed personal dissensions to preclude the proper exercise of your trust,’ ‘Your conduct has been un- becoming your office.’ This is what is charged against him. He is not the Board, has only one vote im the Board, and no failuro, to perform his duties as a member the Board is charged: except those just stated. what information do these charges giv Erhardt asks the Mayor to specify what he neglected. ‘The Mayor refused. He asked the Mayor to tell him int what respect he charged that his conduct had been unbecoming his office. The Mayor refused. Then Mr. Erhardt denied the charges, and asked for tho roof that he might meet it, and the Mayor refueed. Now this is not such a, statement of cause for re- moval or opportunity to be heard thereon as the justice demand. A removal in this way would be aremoval at the arbitrary will of the Mayor. The Mayor could remove in the same way every head of department in the city without any res to pie uilt or innocence, and the Mayor oayie romov M the Governor in the same manner without the slightest opportunity for defence.” ; “What action, then, do you propose taking now?” “I cannot say at present.” of Now, M * the. ‘umstances, then, 1 little use withthe Mayor on the ee “I think 80. The Mayor seems to have decided the casein advance, and states bis decision in his ndtice to the Commissioners. He declined to hear counsel upon the most ,important questions which arose in the case—that is, on giving the Commissioners in- formation as to the causes for their removal and on furnishing them with the proofs: they were to meet. There secms to be nothing left to argne except that the Mayor was wrong.” c “Were not the Commissioners entilled to be heard by counsel?” * , “I think they were. Tho refusal seems to me to have been a violation of one of tho clearest constitu- tional rights’ of every citizen. Take, for instance, the case of General Smith. He submitted his res :omse to the Mayor's communication in writing. The Mayor declined to hear counsel on the effect of it or re garding it, but overruled it without a moment's con- sideration and then proccedcd to insist upon General Smith entering into a colloquy with him on the sub- ject and answering a number of questions not con- tained in the original charges, which the General very properly retused to do, I have seen such a procedure adopted in the French courts, where the unfortanate accused is subjected to an inquisitorial process, but I have never scen any parallel to it in any English or American tribunal. To be called before the Mayoron ond paper containing charges and compelled to answer orally to # lot of other papers (from which the Mayor read) without having ever seen or heard them; to be declared guilty in advance, without being told of what, and required to prove one’s innocence with- out showing what evidence is to be met or what it tends to show, seems to me not quite in accordance with the treatment that public officers are entitiod to receive; and this is what it seems to me the Mayor's proceeding against the Police Commissioners amounts to.” VERY RETICENT. President Smith said last evening to a reporier that he much preferred to have nothing tosay in regard to the proceedings in the Mayor's office. “It yoluimes were said,” he remarked in his pecu- liar, deliberative way, “they could not make tho Mayor's meaning any plainer than it was shown by the séance to-day. «But I am in the hands of my lawyer, and in any case I would not care to say any- thing.’ “have you any idea why the Mayor refused to hear you through counsel ?” asked the reporter. “Lhavon’t the slightest,” said General Smith, have I the slightest idea why Mr. Erhardt was called on before I Nor have I the slightest idea why the Corporation Counsel was there to assist the Mayor, while 1, who am unfitted by years spent in another and very different profeasion, was to be entrapped by all sorts of means into”—here he paused for a moment, as if to select the right expres- sion, and then concluded his sentence—“making mistakes.” “What do yon think of the whole T really can’t sey anything about it. hands of my lawyers.” Mr. Erhardt refused to say anything at all in rele tion to the matter, as did also Mr. Nichole, DEPARTMENT OF DOCKS. A CLAIM AGAINST THE CITY FOR FIFTY-FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS-—-UNANSWERED PETITIONS, A fegular meeting of the Commissioners of Docks was held yesterday morping, but concerning the charges recently brought against the department nothing was said as no one representing fhe associa- tions making complaint appeared. An application from the New Haven Steamship Company for dredg- ing at pior No, 25 East River was denied on the ground that the terms of the lease do notéyuarantes any depth of Water. The application of John English, on behalt of the New York and Brookt Ferry Company, for permission to sublet for t ness pnrposos a part of the New York ferry house foot of Roosevelt street, was also denied. fu AN IMPORTANT CLAIM. A communication from Comptroller Kelly wae read calling attention to the following letter from Measrs. Betts, Atterbury & Betts:— To THe Comptnonixn oF or New Yous Deak Stk—On bebalt nt, Mra C. G ropreserting tho ostate r . deceased, the owner of the patent, issn rige B. Sampson, dated May 21, 1N87, for insulating telograph wires with ae ing? am in the gutta percha, for submaring and other tives, I beg to make the followin statement of whieh 1s enclosed) has been susta ten Cl Courts of this district by His Hon: ately . in the watman vs. the anit had been ‘an elaborate opinion fled November 26, Clinton G, Colg ¥ Wostern Union in progress fo Rede The part the Department of Public Chi has been for upward of eleven year vention. Bowid this manner, at lenst Jom rivers tn the fire alarm ser Harlom in the Police Depa cable cromming the ong cable to Black: '* wd in the artnet Public Charities A Correction, I to say by my eliont that if a te t ois arrived at my client wilt accopt. in full gettioment for past claims the eum of RISA), boing nt the average rate of 85,000 per yerr, This offer Will be understood as made jew to settlement and without prejudies to any fF claim for damages of for prot or savings mada by so of the insntation in case it iy not accept the y client will also be willing to grant @ license for tutare nse of the invention by the city and its departments upon a atatement being rendored of the amount of actod over the wires, and the amount and location ted as Groerived in patent, shuslitis: An tin saint ‘o especially beg your promp' jontion to the matter. rospectfully yours, FREDRIVK HH. BETTS, ons (rane. on of wire Ve law requires or the plainest dictates of | - THE NEW COUNTY CLERK. 4 CALM AFTER THE STORM—CONFERENCE BE TWEEN MESSRS. THOMPSON AND GUMBLEs TON—DIFFICULITES ADOUT PRIVATE PAPERS. There was but little news at the County Clerk's . office yesterday, the new Clerk, Mr. Hubert Q, ‘Thompson, remaining undisturbed in possession be- hind an array of watchful police officers. Superine tendent Walling had called in person on Tuesday evening and given directions to keep a police guard at the office all night, which was accordingly done, At midnight the officers on duty were relieved by another relay of policemen, and in addition to these the office was guarded by « number of Mr. Thomp, son's trusted adjutants. The building was locked at an early hour in the evening, and ample pro- visions were made to frustrate any possible attempt on the part of Mr, Gumbleton or his friends to regain possession. ‘To all appearances, however, all these precantions were useless, for neither Mr. Gumbleton nor his friends made any such effort. Mr. Gumbleton, in company with his counse!, Mr. Beach, called upon Mr. Thompson at about eleven A, M., and quite an interesting inter- view took place between them, Mr. Thompson being fortified by the presence of three of the members of the Bar Association committee as his counsel. MI. GUMBLETON'S HANK BOOKS. Mr. Thompson grected Mr. Guimbleton politely afid the latter bore himself with apparently cheerful equanimity. The interview was strictly private, but Mr. Knox, one of the members of the committee, who was present, gave'the following particulars as to the official business ftransacted:—e saidi Mr. Gumbleton gave up the combination to one of the office safes, which was still un- opened, aud demanded his bank deposit and check books, saying that 1t had been the custom tor all the outgoing County Clerks to take these booka with them upon retiring from the office. It appeared that Mr. Gumbleton had deposited the receipts of hia: ottice with the Real Estate Trust Company and the: Union Trust Company, and he claimed these de- posit and check books as private. Mr. Thomp- son was advised by the committee that it was best that the books should not be removed until he could satisfy himself that the records of the, office contained full entries of the moneys deposited’ and checked against for which the County Clerk: might be responsible. An examination was_mi of the Real Estate Trust Company's books and were then surrendered to Mr. Gumbleton; and in ref-’ erence to the Union Trust Company’s check book it was amicably arranged that it should be examink and gone over by the re} ntatives of both part: | and then zeturned to-Mr. Gumbleton. Mr. Gumble-' ton also claimed a number of his private papers,i which he took, and, after a brief interchange of civil-, ities, he departed. Mr. Beach was not willing to’ say whether Mr. Thompson would be really’ proseented for, trespass, as had been stated, and whether a writ of ouster had been. applied: for against him; but the Bar Association Committee. laughed at the mention of the report ana said that Mr. Gumb!eton had not the shadow of a chance to regain his office, ‘In reference to the charges egainst the Hegistere the commit- tee were all deeply disappointed, and Mr. Knox said that the argument of the Governor shielding the Register had utterly failed to convince him that this officer should not also have been re-: moved. in relation to the charges against the Sheriff the committeo are very reticent, and refusei to say what measures they intend te take in order; to oust that Tammany official and have him replaced) by a good anti-Tammany man. MI. M'LOUGHLIN'’S PAPERS. Mr. McLoughlin, Mr. Gumbleton’s deputy, also, made his appearance at tbe office during the day and: demanded his private papers, which were still in his desk. According to his own statement Mr. Mc- Loughlin was refused admission behind the counter, , but was confronted by Mr. Thompson, who, when, McLoughlin asked to have access to: desk in order that he might get his: private papers, informed him that he must first make out alist or inventory of these Miya which he claimed as his own. Mr. McLoughlin told him that it would be impossible for him to do so, a3 ha could not specity betorchand every paper thet might be in his desk. He then, us a matter of right, manded access to lis desk, saying that among his Papers were some of great value which he must have at once. Mr. Thompson replied that he would senda; clerk with him who would sort out the papers and sco whether they belonged to Mr. McLoughlin or not. This compromise Mr. McLoughlin declined to ac- copt, and left, threatening Mr. Thompson with an order of arrest for the wrongful detention of his private property. ‘ THE NEW CHARGES, The following onter was written out yesterday afters on by a member of the Bar Aesociation Committee, and, duly countersigned by Mr. Thompson, after which it was handed to the newspaper reporters :— Nuw Yorx, March 18, 1879. uty clork-andall.assistants ‘to’ the clerk are ich charges tor any: services done cupacity # are authorized by law. ey are dirocted to keop'at oxuet account of al Pergulsites and emoluments actually recotved by # their official capacity, and also of alf foes, perquisites and emoluments which the clerk 18 entitled to reteive from any person for any service rendered in lis official capacity, hrongh or by the deputy or assistant, ‘Any violation of these directions will subject the person so violating to removnl. Suitnble books, in compliance with law, will be propared HUB ON, as soon ae possible. BRT 0, THOMES' Clerk of the City and County of New York. THE NEW DEPUTY COMMISSIONER. The appointment of Hubert O. Thompson as County Clerk created a vacancy in the position formerly filled by him-—that of Deputy Commissioner of Public Works, Commissioner Allan Campbell yes- terday appointed Frederick H. Hamlin his successor. Mr. Hamlin, who is said to be an earnest anti-Tam- mapy nan, has beov about four years in the Depart- ment of Public Works and has hitherto filled the po- sition of engineer in charge of roads and avenues, It was first understood that Mr. Maurice J. Power . was to have this office, but Mr. Hamlin, who is known to be in "ens favor with the Commissioner, readily secured the appointment. BRODSKEY-PATTERSON, The committee on investigation in the Brodskey- Patterson case met at the Metropolitan Hotel I might. The time was occupied on the part of the counsel of Mr. Patterson to prove intimidation of voters, Opposing counsel indulged in argument upon the question with the committee, Several wit- nesses were called, but nothing of importance was developed. After two witnesses had left the stand Mr. Davenport suggested that it should be recorded that they had given their evidence without beti sworn, An adjournment was taken until three P, to-day. CONSECRATION OF A CHAPEL. The Right Rev. Bishop Lynch, of .Charleston, officiated at the consecration of the altarsof the new chapel of the Foundling Asylum yesterday morning. The door of the tabernacle being left sjar indicated that the sacrament had not yet been deposited there, while the plain adornment of the altar signified that all of its furnishings were as yot unconsecrated. The Bishop first sprinkled the altart three times with holy water, and then snointed first the centre and successively each of; the four corners with holy chrism, using, the prayera appointed by the Ohurch. He then incensed the altar, while the attendant clergy chanted an appropriate aythem. The archt- tect, Mr. Le Brun, then alvanc the side of the Bishop, and together they cemented the “altar stone” containing the relics of the patron saint of the chapel. ‘his stone was placed directly in the cengre of tho alter, before door of the taber- pacle. Small lighted wax were then placed mr corners of the al- upon this stone and at’ the tar, aud while they were burning the clergy chanted; the consecration ‘psalms, The master of ceromonies then cleaned the altar and tho sister sacristan as-? gisted him to decorate it for the mass, which was; celebrated by His Eminence the Cardinal. The choir; of St. Xavier's Chnrch sung the anthem ‘“Aspergos,”” while the procession of cross bearer, acolytes, clergy and, lastly, the Cardinal entered the chapel to pertorm the ceremony. ° ‘The chapel is located between the main buildt and the new castern wing. It is totally devoid desoration save the windows, Which are painted imy mosaic patterns of pale blue and creamy tints,; ble ing harmoniously with faint dashes of ertmson, gold and dark brown. The walls rsand benches all arpet of crimson and black covers ntral aisle. The altars are somi- with just sufficient carving to ree The vases the floor of cirentar tn shap lieve thoir otherwise plain appearance. of alabaster, candelabra of gold plate and all the altar adornments arc the gifts of the ladies of the Foundling Asylum Association. GREENWOOD CEMETERY. A meeting of the lot owners of Greenwood Pcometory was held yesterday at the office of the cemetery, No. 30 Broadway. Tho report for the year | ending December 31, 1878, was presented by Mr, | Robert Ray, chairman of the Board of Trustees, and reads as follows:—The receipts amounted to $199,324 98 and the expenditures to $198,423 04; cash on hand, $6,136 48, The assets or fund for the im- provement and permanent care of tho cemetery have reached $551,722 16, of which $165,000 are in United States government bonds, $70,000 in New York city bonds and $120,000 in Brooklyn city bonds, The amonnt received in trast for the care of private lots was $9,000, and the funds on hand for this purpose amount to $49,316 03, The number of lots of varying dimensions sold last year wax 209, which makes the total number sold at the; close of the year 92,445, aud since the commencement , of 1879 21 jots have been disposed of. The inters ments during 1878 were 4,495, tho total number at! the close of the year being 14,615, and since January 1, 1879, 1,292 additional interments have been made, The report calls the attention of the lot owners to the subject of securing the undisturbed interment of themselves and families in the lots which tye own by rendering 1t impossible for.their heirs-at-law to, sell them, many sales of the kind having oceurred during the last few years, crtsing the removal of the bodies of the original owners and their to! graves in public lots, ‘