Слике страница

our people in the densely populated parts of our city shall fully enjoy the benefits of such expenditures.

"We urge greater care and thoroughness in the enforcement of the health laws, and demand the establishment of more efficient safeguards against disease. "We favor the establishment of adequate Public Baths and Lavatories for the promotion of cleanliness and increased public comfort at appropriate places throughout the city.

"We demand the adoption of a thorough system of Street Cleaning, which shall also include a proper disposition of the refuse and garbage, so that our harbor may be kept free from obstruction and defilement, and the neighboring shores clear of offal, thus conforming to the methods of other great cities. "We call for increased Rapid Transit facilities in this city.

"We call for the improvement of the Docks and Water Fronts of our great maritime city, so that it shall enjoy the advantages to which it is entitled by its unique position with its unrivaled harbor.

"We heartily favor the separation of Municipal from State and National Elections, and a larger measure of Home Rule for cities.

"We appeal to the people of this city to cast aside party prejudice and to combine with us in a determined effort to elect candidates chosen solely with reference to their ability and integrity, and pledged to conduct the affairs of this city on a strictly non-partisan basis, and who will, as far as may be in their power, insure Good Government to the city of New York."

The task before the Committee was to nominate a ticket which should adequately represent the principles of this platform; and which would secure the indorsement of all factions, parties and individuals opposed to Tammany rule. It was equally necessary that the character of the candidates should be such as 10 afford an undoubted guarantee that they would fulfill the promises of the platform and give to the citizens, in its truest sense, a non-partisan business administration of municipal affairs.

Nearly all the political organizations had fixed dates for their nominating conventions. Precipitate action by any one of them might easily have precluded an effective union against Tammany. The Committee's first step, therefore, was to formally request the conventions to adjourn without other action than the naming of conference committees. This was acceded to by the various organizations, and the way was open to conference. The essential thing was that the conference should not degenerate into, or lead to, a mere "deal." Whatever method should be adopted for choosing the candidates, it was requisite that the Seventy should take the initiative and avoid yielding to any sort of dictation from the parties. This was the only course fair to the people, who had demanded non-partisan reform, and at the same time only this course could protect each party from the other and make harmonious action possible. The Executive Committee, therefore, early began the consideration of possible candidates, with a view to naming a ticket that might, on being submitted in conference, be at once acceptable to the organizations.

Conference was had with each of the organizations singly, not to discuss the names of possible candidates, but to learn the attitude of each body to the proposed non-partisan action of the Citizens' Committee. The Republicans of both factions demanded that a Republican should head the ticket. The Good Government Clubs, true to the essential principle of their existence, had no

opinion regarding the politics of candidates, but pledged their support for any ticket the Seventy should name on its own initiative. The anti-Tammany Democrats and the Independent County Organization said their object was the defeat of the ring, and they would support the Committee. The GermanAmerican Reform Union preferred a Democrat, on grounds of expediency, but would accept such a Republican as Mr. Seth Low. The State Democrats. argued in conference for a Democrat. Practically, therefore, it was shown by these conferences that the party conferrees were still partisan, and the only course for the Seventy was to reach a decision in the light of all the facts and arguments, and then appeal to a general conference of the organizations and to the people for approval and support.

Time pressed. The Seventy's Executive Committee was uninterruptedly at work, and yet the adjourned conventions were about to reconvene before a Citizens' ticket was chosen. It was determined to present a name for the Mayoralty, and request further conference as to the other offices. The Committee had considered many names, and finally approved six or eight men as suitable candidates. The sole remaining question was regarding their vote-getting qualities. The belief prevailed that advantage must be taken of the tremendous anti-Tammany sentiment created by the Senate investigation, and it was decided that John W. Goff, as peculiarly instrumental in arousing this sentiment, should be the Citizens' candidate for Mayor. And, as Mr. Goff is a Democrat, it was resolved that the remainder of the ticket should be substantially Republican. This report was presented to the general conference of anti-Tammany organizations.

Here, however, it was officially announced that the Republican organization would not accept Mr. Goff, and as that gentleman declined the proffered nomination unless it should preclude the possibility of a straight Republican ticket, it was apparent that a union was not yet effected "entirely outside of party politics." An adjournment of the conference was had, and in the interval the Committee determined that William L. Strong was the next most available man on its list for the Mayoralty. But as Mr. Strong is a Republican, it was mani. fest that the Committee must itself complete the ticket in a way to demonstrate its non-partisanship, and, if possible, make it acceptable to anti-machine DemoThis was done as follows:


[blocks in formation]

The reception of this ticket by the organization conferrees was not such as to promise unanimity, but the Citizens' Committee announced itself as prepared to stand by the result of its difficult and honest effort. Should the organizations refuse to unite, the Seventy would appeal to the individual voters for union, irrespective of organization allegiance.

This determination of the Committee of Seventy finally secured the indorsement of all the parties and factions in opposition to Tammany Hall. The campaign was begun with one ticket, constituted so as to leave no doubt of the

non-partisanship of the candidates, who were pledged to maintain the platform which emphasized this principle.

The Executive Committee appointed a Press Committee, constituted as follows:




This Committee added to its membership Mr. Joseph B. Gilder, Mr. James B. Reynolds and Mr. A. von Briesen.

The Press Committee found that the press of the city were almost unanimous in support of the Reform Ticket. The labors of the Committee were directed largely, therefore, toward the preparation of material for the press. from day to day, which the newspapers were most willing and eager to publish as news matter, and for the publication of which the citizens and the Committee of Seventy were duly grateful. The Committee having decided to appeal to the eyes of the citizens by a graphic portrayal of Tammany corruption, republished two of the most effective cartoons that had been designed by W. A. Rogers for Harper's Weekly, and secured from him the design of a new and original anti-Tammany cartoon (here reproduced) which was posted everywhere conspicuously throughout the city. This aroused anew the growing opposition to the Tammany government.

The position of the Committee of Seventy was stated in a manifesto, prepared by the Press Committee, which was substantially left unanswered. It embodied the principles of the platform, and presented an analysis of the fraud and corruption that had been practiced under the Tammany government. It is here republished:

[blocks in formation]

"The Committee of Seventy arraigns Tammany Hall for what it has done and what it has failed to do for the city of New York. Every accusation made is based on facts, and the Committee challenges Tammany to disprove them.

"FIRST. The Committee of Seventy denounces Tammany Hall, because it is not, in a proper sense, a political body, but a purely personal one, existing solely for selfish and dishonest ends. The Committee charges that the organization of Tammany is despotic; that it is not even representative in form; that its By-Laws clothe the Committee on Organization with absolute power to set aside any vote that the members of Tammany Hall might give at Primary Elections; that these By-Laws provide that:

"The Committee on Organization shall be charged with the consideration of all matters relating to organization of the Democratic Party, the call of Primary Elections, and the conducting of Primary, General, Special and Charter Elections, and shall, in their discretion, have power of revision and substitution of all nominations hereafter made by conventions called by the General

Committee or any District Committee of this Organization, whenever the honor, preservation and integrity of this Organization shall require such action.'

"This Committee on Organization has despotic power to make nominations, and its power is so great that it appoints and elects, through its official agents to office, persons who will do its bidding. Nominations from such an organization, and determined in such a manner, are not nominations by the people. We therefore arraign Tammany Hall for its undemocratic character.

"SECOND. We denounce Tammany Hall because it has appointed to important and responsible offices of the city, men dishonest and criminal. It has, during the past four years, appointed as Police Justice one previously indicted. for willful neglect of duty as Excise Commissioner; another as Excise Commissioner, who was indicted for willfully disregarding the law; as Police Justice, an associate of notorious thieves; and as Fire Commissioner, one indicted for murder, from which he escaped only on the plea of insanity.

"THIRD. We denounce Tammany Hall because, under its administration, systematic blackmail and extortion wring from the citizens many millions, and because the expenses of the city government have constantly increased without any corresponding benefit to the community. It has endeavored to conceal this increase in expenditure by a misleading reduction of the tax rate. We take the following figures from the Comptroller's Report and challenge Tammany Hall to disprove them:

[blocks in formation]

"In 1874 the tax rate was 2.29, reduced to 1.79 in 1894. Behind this reduction of the tax rate Tammany tries to shield the enormous increase of expenditure, claiming that because the rate is lower the tax bills are less. By increasing the value of taxable property from $1,153,795,141 in 1874, to $2,003,332,037 in 1894, it has made many tax bills larger while making the rate lower.


"FOURTH. We denounce Tammany Hall because it has wasted public money by most wasteful and extravagant expenditure of the funds raised by taxation. We charge that the largest increase in expenditure is often accompanied by the greatest inefficiency.

"The Department of Street Cleaning spent in the year 1884, $1,050,000, while

in the year 1894 the amount is $2,367,390, an increase of $1,317,390, and yet the streets of New York are a reproach to our civilization. People living up-town are forced to employ private street cleaners and ash and garbage carts, while in the down-town districts, which are dependent solely on the City Department, the accumulation of dirt and garbage endangers the health of the community. If business methods were applied, every street in the city would be washed at night, when there is little travel, and would be kept clean during the day as in the other great capitals of the world. Street sprinkling would be done at the public expense by the Department, and not as now, by a favored Company, to which the exclusive right to sprinkle for ten years has been given, without limitation as to the charges it may make. In no European capital are the citizens obliged to make terms with a private company in order to have their streets sprinkled.

"FIFTH.-We denounce Tammany Hall because much of the increase of expenditure is, to a great extent, due to gross dishonesty. Supplies are bought wastefully and extravagantly, and names are placed on the pay-rolls and money dishonestly paid for services never rendered. One of the Fire Commissioners, who was independent of Tammany Hall, felt called to resign because supplies were bought and paid for above the market price. The dishonesty and fraud practiced by means of the pay-roll are clearly seen on examination. The Bureau of Repairs and Supplies of the Department of Public Works, while under the charge of the present Mayor, and in 1893, had on its pay-roll, for the sweeping and cleaning of the new Court House in the City Hall Park, over fifty employés whose annual salaries exceeded $23,000. There were on the pay-roll for cleaning the City Hall more than twenty-five names, at an annual cost of $13,000. There were on the pay-roll for cleaning the brown stone building in City Hall Park more than twenty-three persons, with salaries aggregating $11,000. There were in the Register's Office ten cleaners on the pay-roll at a cost of $4,500. The City is charged for the mere cleaning of these four buildings, a sum in excess of $51,500 per annum. Not one-half of the persons whose names appear on the pay-roll are honestly employed at this work. We are ready to prove that all of these buildings can be thoroughly cleaned for a sum aggregating less than $10,000 per annum. In this way Tammany robs the tax-payer of many millions, for its methods are much the same in every Department, and the total pay-roll of the City is in excess of $12,000,000 per annum.

"SIXTH.-We charge that the Dock Department, to which the official head of Tammany Hall points with satisfaction, is an ever increasing burden to the tax-payer, while it should be a source of large revenue. Mayor Gilroy admits the issue of Dock Bonds since 1884 to the amount of $9,500,000, and he attempts to justify this expenditure by the fact that the revenue from Dock rents in 1894 is $1,839,658.78 against $1,246,858.19 in 1884, a net gain, as he claims, of $592,800. He forgets, however, to take into account the annual expenditure. In the year 1884 there was spent for construction, according to the report of the Dock Department, $575,080.87, leaving expenses for administration $185,025.93, and a net profit above rents of $1,061,832.26. Making the same calculations for the year 1894, there is spent for new property $2,468,173, leaving for administration $330,281 (an increase of 80 per cent.), and deducting this from rents there is a net profit of $1,509,377. This shows an increase in the net revenue of only $447,545 for the ten years, 1884 to 1894,

« ПретходнаНастави »