division of the city whether the boundaries of the new wards should be established by the common council or by the Legislature. The charter of Rochester gives no authority to the common council to increase the number of wards, so that object can clearly be accomplished only by legislative act. The question of Home Rule is therefore not involved except as to the attempt on the part of the Legislature to fix the boundaries of the new wards. But this is within the undoubted province of the Legislature, and the bill takes the natural course of amending the city charter, in which the ward limits have always been defined. I perceive nothing radical, therefore, or in violation of the spirit of Home Rule in the features of the bill. On the contrary I am convinced by the arguments presented at the hearing that the bill is an eminently fair and just one. While the division of the city into new wards undoubtedly creates some confusion and embarrassment, the good effects of the proposed legislation in my opinion outweigh the possible bad effects. The bill will give the city twenty supervisors instead of sixteen, and a predominance of representation therefore in the county board. This is as it should be, for now with a population of 140,000, and paying 72 per cent. of the taxes, the city is represented in the county board of supervisors with only sixteen supervisors, while the remainder of the county, with a population of only 55,000 and paying only 28 per cent. of the taxes, is represented by nineteen supervisors. The injustice of the continuance of such an unbalanced representation must be evident to everybody. Moreover this bill, if the board of supervisors discharges its duties fairly, will give the city of Rochester two out of the three members of Assembly to which the county of Monroe is entitled. The bill will give the citizens of Rochester a greater voice in the management of their own affairs than they have at present. The division of wards seems to be so fair politically that neither party will have any particular advantage. It will be the fault of the people themselves if their chosen officers and representatives in the city government are not worthy men. Upon the whole, while there may be defects in the bill, I believe its provisions in the main will be advantageous to the city and I cheerfully give it my approval. ROSWELL P. FLOWER. MEMORANDUM FILED WITH ASSEMBLY BILL STATE OF NEW YORK. Albany, February 9, 1892. Memorandum filed with Assembly bill No. 72, entitled "An act to incorporate the State Executive Committee of the Young Women's Christian Association of the State of New York." -Approved. This bill follows the general lines of Chapter 137 of the Laws of 1886, incorporating the Executive Committee of the Young Men's Christian Association. The general laws now in force do not provide for the incorporation of a committee of this nature elected by other corporations. This law and Chapter 137 of the Laws of 1886 are the only instances of this precise nature which seem to have arisen. It is urged and appears probable that no similar occasion will hereafter arise, and that a general law for future similar cases will not be necessary. In such exceptional cases special legislation is proper until the necessity of a general law becomes apparent, and I have, therefore, affixed my signature to the bill. ROSWELL P. FLOWER. IN THE MATTER OF HENRY G. KILBURN, DISTRICT ATTORNEY OF FRANKLIN COUNTY.— NOTICE AND SUMMONS. STATE OF NEW YORK. Executive Chamber. In the Matter of the Charges preferred against Henry G. Kilburn, the District Attorney of the County of Franklin. To HENRY G. KILBURN, District Attorney of the County of Franklin: You are hereby notified that charges of misconduct and malversation in office have been preferred against you by Orrando P. Dexter of the city of New York and a copy of said charges is herewith served upon you. You are therefore hereby required to show cause why you should not be removed from the office of District Attorney of the county of Franklin and to answer the said charges within eight days after service of this order and a copy of said charges upon you. [L. S.] In witness whereof I have hereunto signed my name ROSWELL P. FLOWER. By the Governor : T. S. WILLIAMS, Private Secretary. DESIGNATION OF JUSTICE WRIGHT FOR MADISON CIRCUIT. STATE OF NEW YORK. Executive Chamber. WHEREAS, It appears that the Circuit Court and Court of Oyer and Terminer appointed to be held in and for the county of Madison on the third Monday of January, 1892, and which were necessarily adjourned, are in danger of failing by reason of the illness of the Honorable Gerrit A. Forbes, the Justice of the Supreme Court designated to hold the same; NOW, THEREFORE, in accordance with the statute in such case made and provided, I do hereby designate and appoint the Honorable MAURICE L. WRIGHT a Justice of the Supreme Court, to hold the said Circuit Court and Court of Oyer and Terminer, in the place of the said Honorable Gerrit A. Forbes. Given under my hand and the privy seal of the State, at the Capitol in the city of Albany, this twelfth [L. S.] day of February in the year of our Lord one thousand eight hundred and ninety-two. By the Governor : T. S. WILLIAMS, 7 ROSWELL P. FLOWER. Private Secretary. VETO, SENATE BILL, NOT PRINTED, TO CHANGE THE NAME OF THE R. P. D. CHURCH OF CATTSBANE. STATE OF NEW YORK. Executive Chamber, Albany, February 15, 1892. TO THE SENATE: Senate bill, not printed, entitled “An act to authorize the correction of the title of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church of Cattsbane," is herewith returned without approval. This is a special bill the only object of which is to change the corporate name of "The Reformed Protestant Dutch Church of Cattsbane" to "The Reformed Protestant Dutch Church of Katsbaan." There is already a general law (Laws of 1870, chap. 322, as amended by Laws of 1891, chap. 38) authorizing such a corporation as this to effect a change of name by application to the Supreme Court. In pursuance of such general law this corporation might have applied to the court rather than to the Legislature for the change of name desired. This bill is, therefore, unnecessary special legislation and I cannot, consistently with sound principles of legislation, give it my approval. ROSWELL P. FLOWER. |