John Fiske, in his admirable work on "Civil Government," thus succinctly describes the new system of city government: "Besides the council of [nineteen] Aldermen, the people elect only three city officers,—the Mayor, comptroller, and auditor. The comptroller is the principal finance officer and book-keeper of the city; and the auditor must approve bills against the city, whether great or small, before they can be paid. The Mayor appoints, without confirmation by the council, all executive heads of departments; and these executive heads are individuals, not boards. Thus there is a single police commissioner, a single fire commissioner, a single health commissioner, and so on; and each of these heads appoints his own subordinates; 'so that the principle of defined responsibility permeates the city government from top to bottom.'[40] In a few cases where the work to be done is rather discretionary than executive in character, it is intrusted to a board; thus, there is a board of assessors, a board of education, and a board of elections. These are all appointed by the Mayor, but for terms not coincident with his own; 'so that, in most cases, no Mayor would appoint the whole of any such board unless he were to be twice elected by the people.' But the executive officers are appointed by the Mayor for terms coincident with his own, that is, for two years. 'The Mayor is elected at the general election in November; he takes office on the first of January following, and for one month the great departments of the city are carried on for him by the appointees of his predecessor. On the first of January it becomes his duty to appoint his own heads of departments,' and thus 'each incoming Mayor has the opportunity to make an administration in all its parts in sympathy with himself.'
"With all these immense executive powers intrusted to the Mayor, however, he does not hold the purse-strings. He is a member of a board of estimates, of which the other four members are the comptroller and auditor, with the county treasurer and supervisor. This board recommends the amount to be raised by taxation for the ensuing year. These estimates are then laid before the council of Aldermen, who may cut down single items as they see fit, but have not the power to increase any item. The Mayor must see to it that the administrative work of the year does not use up more money than is thus allowed to him."[41]
The first Mayor to act under this charter amendment was Seth Low, who was elected, in 1881, over Howell by a vote of 45,434 to 40,937.[42] Low, who was born in Brooklyn, where his family had occupied a distinguished position, and had graduated from Columbia College in 1870, afterward entering the business house of his father, was in his thirty-second year when elected to office, a circumstance which, added to the novelty of the conditions under which his administration must work, did not fail to attract special attention throughout the country.
In his first message (January, 1882) Low touched upon the important question of the appointing power:—
"The manifest purpose of the act is to make the Mayor the responsible head of the city government, and to secure a homogeneous government by laying upon each Mayor the necessity of making his appointments at the beginning of his term. To accomplish this purpose the act does some things by direct provision and some things by implication. It provides, in section I, that the terms of office of certain specified officers shall expire on the first of February, 1882. It then provides, in section 6, that 'after the first day of January, 1882, the Mayor of the city of Brooklyn shall have sole and exclusive power to appoint the successor of any commissioner or other head of department (except the department of finance and the department of audit), or of any assessor or member of the board of education of said city, when the terms of such officers shall respectively expire, or as by law may then or thereafter be required to be appointed.'
"There are certain officers in the city whose terms of office expired some time in the year 1881, to wit: The corporation counsel, the city treasurer, the collector of taxes, and the registrar of arrears, and to these officers the charter amendment makes no distinct reference. The reason that the present incumbents hold over is that, by section 5 of that amendment, all power to appoint during 1881 was taken away from the Mayor and Common Council, where it formerly resided, without being lodged anywhere else, except that the sole power of filling vacancies during 1881 was lodged with the Mayor. The evident purpose of this provision was to place the appointment of the successors to the present incumbents of these offices in the hands of the Mayor to be elected by the people in 1881. So much is clear; but it leaves two points uncertain: First, when are the successors to the present incumbents to be appointed? Second, when appointed, is it for the balance of an unexpired term, or for two years?
"I shall be governed by what I believe to be the clear and intelligent purpose of the law. I shall appoint the four officers alluded to so that their terms shall begin practically on the first of February, or at the same time with the officers distinctly mentioned in the act, and I shall appoint them for two years."
Speaking further of appointments and removals, Low said:—
"It is a matter of grave public concern for the people to know in what spirit an officer intrusted for the first time in the history of our city with such powers purposes to use them. The whole theory of the law is that the Mayor shall be responsible for the administration of the city's affairs, and for the policy which animates the different departments. It makes the relation of the different commissioners and heads of departments to the Mayor practically that of the cabinet officer to his chief. I feel it to be a matter of no less importance to my successors than to myself to emphasize this thought. It is no reproach to Mr. Evarts that President Garfield placed Mr. Blaine at the head of the State Department. It is no reproach to Mr. Blaine that President Arthur has called Senator Frelinghuysen to succeed him; and what is true of the State Department is equally true of a purely administrative department like the post-office. It will, therefore, be a great injustice to any official who may be retired through my action to interpret it into reproach upon him, just as it would be equal injustice to me to assume that I meant it as such; or to my successor, to hamper him with any obligations toward my appointees. The Mayor being responsible to the people must be left free from such personal embarrassments. I claim this right, as I believe, in the interest of good government, for my successors and for myself.
"The law does not give the Mayor the absolute power of removal. I presume it was not thought to be necessary. But the whole purpose of the law will be defeated unless the Mayor knows at all times and under all circumstances that he is responsible because his appointees represent him. If any of them get out of harmony with him he must ask for their resignations, and he is entitled to receive them on demand. I hazard nothing in saying that the people of Brooklyn elected me Mayor with the full purpose of placing precisely this responsibility upon me. As there is no precedent to govern in this case, I wish to state distinctly that the acceptance of an appointment at my hands will be evidence to the community that the gentleman accepting it has personally given me his assurance that he will without delay give me his resignation whenever I ask for it."
The remainder of the message was in the same spirit, and left the people of Brooklyn in no doubt that the new Mayor meant to interpret the movement represented by the charter amendments in its most radical and reformatory light.
Low was renominated in 1883. The Democrats nominated Joseph C. Hendrix,[43] who led a brilliant campaign. In a hotly contested election that drew out an extraordinary vote, Low was elected by a vote of 49,554 against Hendrix's 48,006.
The two administrations of Low demonstrated beyond question the availability of the "Brooklyn system." In his message for 1884 the Mayor offered a strong plea in behalf of the public schools, in which free books had just been introduced.