The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1868-02-06

-tE .. ssEsAHtt. Hess
The presentation OF the demonstrates
against the Portland and Ogdensburg Rail-
road bill to the City Government was proper
thing 10 do. 1t would have been proper
enough for the remonstrants to ask the con-
currence Of the Board of Trade, or the Wild
owls Wood Society, or the Eon Base Ball
Club Any OF these bodies would have been
competent to concur in the remonstrance,
though probably none of them would have
done so by a majority vote. The City Gov
eminent, we believe, has sent the document
to the Legislature without taking any action
thereon. The Argus thereupon inquiries
with great show of Indignation, What is
such City Government good for?" to which
the Star appropriately replies, "Good:for mind
ing its own business"
The City Council is not elected, as the Ar
gus seems to think, to manage the affairs OF
the city arbitrarily in accordance with its own
sweet will, but to execute the wishes of the
electors It would be rather high handed
proceeding for City Council to appear in its
official character before the Legislature, OBJ
jecting to the submission of an important
question to the decision of their fellow citizens
If their opposition to a pending measure were
justified by the attitude OF majority Of their
constituents, that very fact would do away with
any necessity for interference. II on the con-
trary more than two-thirds of their fellow citi-
zens should differ with them, what right have
they to pretend to represent the city in the
matter? In either case, the interference ofthe
City Government as such would be wholly out
of place and out of character. W
AS individuals, of course the twenty-nire
gentlemen constituting the City Government
have a perfect right to oppose this proposition
in the Legislature or elsewhere, as earnestly
as possible. We suppose there is difference
of opinion about it in the City Council. as there
is among our business mon and capitalists
throughout the city. There ought howevel
to be no difficulty in reaching practical con
clusion. Let us have the matter discussed
Letus hear what can be said on both sides. l
the objections TO this investment are so stronp
as the remonstrants represent, there can be NJ
difficulty in persuading at least third Of the
voters of Portland of their soundness. The
attempt to smother the discussion, to pre-
vent the matter from being agitated at all
LOOKS like ulstfttsS eltucf o. tilS WelSHJ Vi TIT
objections or of the discretion of the people o
Portland. We do not believe this communit,
is crazy, and we prefer to hear what is to bf
said on both sides before coming to any con
clusion.
As to the proprety or necessity OF dragging
this matter into politics, there can hardly BE-
two opinions. We are all of us, Republicans
and Democrats alike, in favor of the road anG
willing to help it so far as we can without ser
GUS embarrassment; we are all alike interest
ed in the prosperity and credit of the city. i
would be dishonest to reply to the nnealiea 6
attack of the Argus upon the City Government
by alleging that the Democratic party in Port
land is endeavoring to prevent the construc
ton of railroad which would do for us morG
than TIN Grand Trunk road has done. The
list of signatures to the remonstraEce forbid
that assertion on our part, but 10 more forci
bly, than it should have forbidden the attempI
of the Argus to make party matter of a ques
ton which in no way belongs TO politics