NEW YORK (STATE). 



583 



by a committee from its Board of Managers, and also 

 by another appointed by the last Assembly. Each 

 committee reported that such a condition of affairs had 

 been permitted to exist in this reformatory as, to say 

 the least, was calculated to impair the confidence of 

 the people in the management and thus diminish its 

 usefulness. Since these reports were made public, 

 efforts to fill the places of some of the managers whose 

 terms had expired, failed in such a manner as to plain- 

 ly indicate a determination on the part of at least some 

 members of the board to perpetuate its management. 

 It is well for tax -payers to know whether the State 

 has control of these institutions, and it is well for the 

 people to inquire whether abuses in a house of refuge, 

 intended for the care of children, should not be cor- 

 rected by a change of management. 1 have carefully 

 abstained from any interference with appropriations 

 for the maintenance and repair of this institution as 

 now conducted ; but I deem it my duty to prevent the 

 present management from extending its field of opera- 

 tions at the expense of the State. 



On recommendation of the Governor, a spe- 

 cial committee of the Assembly was appointed 

 to investigate, during the recess, charges of 

 irregularity and extravagance in expenses for 

 the repair of armories and arsenals. The com- 

 mittee proceeded at once to its investigation, 

 and on the IGth of July filed with the Secre- 

 tary of State a report sustaining the charges. 

 It showed that extravagant expenditures had 

 been made, and alleged that there was corrup- 

 tion in the making of contracts. The general 

 conclusion of the committee was given in the 

 following language : 



The committee are of the opinion that Gen. "Wylie. 

 by reason of his delegating to Mr. Deegan authority in 

 the management and supervision of repairs and neg- 

 lecting to have proper supervision or make personal 

 inspection of the acts of Mr. Deegan as superintend- 

 ent in the making of contracts, or in requiring written 

 reports as to the amount, necessity, and value of 

 contemplated repairs, and payment of bills without 

 requiring any written reports as to the manner in 

 which work had been performed, and giving contracts 

 without competition, and requiring no formal contract 

 to be entered into for the performance of the work, 

 and in the loose and unbusinesslike management or 

 his department, has been unfaithful and derelict in 

 the discharge ot his duties to the State. The commit- 

 tee recommend the enactment of a law requiring a 

 detailed statement of all expenditures in the military 

 department to be made to the Legislature before the 

 15th of January annually, and that all contracts for 

 the doing of work or furnishing supplies in the mili- 

 tory department involving the expenditure of $100 or 

 upward shall be in writing, executed in duplicate, one 

 filed in the office of the Chief of Ordnance, and the 

 other in the office of the Adjutant-General. 



One result of the investigation of affairs in 

 New York city by the special committee of 

 the Assembly was an application to the Gov- 

 ernor for the removal from office of Sheriff 

 Alexander V. Davidson, on charges based 

 upon evidence taken by the committee. The 

 case was not taken up by the Governor until 

 the month of September, when the sheriff was 

 notified to appear and make answer to the 

 charges. A motion to dismiss them because 

 not duly certified was denied, and the proper 

 certification directed to be made, but the case 

 was not decided before Governor Cleveland 

 resigned his office at the beginning of 1885. 



The Political Canvass. The political canvass in 



the State was specially interesting, owing to 

 the fact that two of its prominent citizens, 

 President. Chester A. Arthur and Gov. Grover 

 Cleveland, were regarded as possible candi- 

 dates of the two political parties for the office 

 of President of the United States. Each had 

 zealous supporters and vigorous opponents in 

 his own party. The President was opposed 

 largely by men who had formerly been hos- 

 tile to Senator Conkling and Gen. Grant, and 

 who were in favor of the nomination of James 

 G. Elaine, and was also regarded with disfavor 

 by some of the independent elements of the 

 party and the more ardent advocates of civil- 

 service reform. The opposition to Gov. Cleve- 

 land came chiefly from the Tammany organi- 

 zation in the city of New York, to which his 

 course as Governor had not been satisfactory. 



The Republican State Committee met in 

 New York on the 4th of March and issued a 

 call for the party convention to be held at 

 Utica on the 23d of April. It was announced 

 that four delegates at large and four alternates 

 to the National Convention were to be chosen, 

 and also district delegates and alternates in 

 case such representatives should not have 

 been selected in the districts before the meet- 

 ing of the State Convention. The option of 

 choosing the district delegates in district con- 

 ventions not less than fifteen days prior to the 

 State Convention was announced. There was 

 some controversy over the question of holding 

 district conventions, but they were in every 

 case held, leaving to the State Convention 

 only the choice of delegates at large. After 

 the meeting of the committee, the question 

 was also raised as to the propriety of nomi- 

 nating two candidates for judges of the Court 

 of Appeals, the only State officers to be elect- 

 ed this year, at the same convention that 

 was called to choose delegates to the National 

 Convention. This was not authoritatively set- 

 tled until the convention met, when it was de- 

 cided to make the nominations, and the two 

 incumbents of the bench, whose terms were 

 to expire, Charles H. Andrews, Republican, 

 and Charles A. Rapallo, Democrat, were nomi- 

 nated without opposition. The friends of Ar- 

 thur and Elaine were very nearly equally 

 divided in the convention, and the balance of 

 power was held by seventy-six representatives 

 of the Independent element, who favored the 

 nomination of Senator George F. Edmunds, of 

 Vermont, for President. These men, by skill- 

 ful management and a combination with the 

 Arthur men, secured the choice of Andrew D. 

 White, Theodore Roosevelt, John J. Gilbert, 

 and Edwin Packard, as delegates at large to 

 the National Convention at Chicago. These 

 men were not identified with either the Elaine 

 or the Arthur faction, and with the exception 

 of the first were known to favor the nomi- 

 nation of Edmunds. The platform adopted 

 declared, among other things, that the Re- 

 publican party of the State expressed 



Its satisfaction with the honest, frugal, and intelli- 



