"NEW YORK, _Sept. 22d, 1876_.
"To his Excellency SAMUEL J. TILDEN,
"_Governor of the State of New York_.
"SIR,--It is probable that William M. Tweed, a noted
delinquent, who went abroad many months since, will be tendered to
the custody of the Sheriff of the City and County of New York within
a few days.
"At the time of his departure the same sheriff held him in formal
custody under an order of arrest in a civil action requiring bail in
$3,000,000. Since his departure judgment has been recovered against
him in that action at the suit of the State to an amount exceeding
$6,000,000.
"For his negligence in permitting the escape there was, in fact, no
ordinary civil remedy against the sheriff except a very trivial and
inadequate one on his official bond. The proper steps for securing
this measure of redress have been pursued with all proper diligence;
and, until this time, there did not seem to be any utility in
prosecuting any other line of action. But as Tweed may be again in
custody at an early period, it has now become important to consider
what course should be adopted for the purpose of rendering that
custody safe and secure. As already stated, the remedies allowed
by law against the delinquent custodian who allows his prisoner
to escape are totally inadequate. Consequently, should Tweed be
again in legal custody, there will be no effective security for his
detention to meet the awards of civil and criminal justice, except
what may be afforded by the personal and official fidelity and
vigilance of the custodian.
"Your predecessor, Governor John A. Dix, made a public and official
remonstrance against the palpable favoritism displayed towards
this person in his then existing custody as a prisoner in the
Penitentiary. During the same year the Sheriff of the City and
County of New York, by gross negligence, suffered the escape of
Genet, a convict of the same general class as Tweed.
"With these circumstances to excite vigilance, the present sheriff
nevertheless allowed Tweed to enjoy a sort of free custody,
precisely similar to that which had been accorded to Genet; and
Tweed, availing himself of the facility, left the State.
"Would it be proper, on Tweed's return, to place him in charge of
the same officer? I think you will answer this question in the
negative.
"The Constitution, arts. 10, secs. 1 and 5, together with the act
of 1848, Edmonds Statutes, vol. 3, p. 330, affords to you as Chief
Executive the means of meeting the exigency. You can, on brief
notice to him, remove the present sheriff and appoint a perfectly
reliable custodian to receive the prisoner.
"Perhaps all the office I ought to assume in this matter properly
ends here. But, when one acts at all in an important affair,
he ought to do all that his best judgment dictates towards
accomplishing the object in view.
"The history of Tweed's prosecutions, imprisonments, judicial
releases, and ultimate deliverance from custody is well known to
you and the public. To it I refer for a justification of my further
remarks.
"The person whom you may appoint to fill the place made vacant by a
removal of the present sheriff can hold only until the end of the
present year. A new sheriff, elected by the people, with full notice
of their needs in November next, will enter on his duties on the 1st
of January, 1877. For the short term of about three months created
by the removal, I take leave to recommend the appointment of General
Francis C. Barlow. His persistent hostility to official swindlers,
and his zealous activity in prosecuting Tweed to conviction, are
well known to you. Tweed would not escape from his hands. I have
consulted no one on this subject, nor have I any knowledge that
General Barlow would accept the office. Should he do so, you will
have well performed your duty; and, in any event, your tender of
the appointment will effectually refute all assertions that you owe
Tweed favor, or fear his disclosures.
"Yours, &c.,
"CH. O'CONOR."