Orleans County monitor. [volume] (Barton, Vt.) 1872-1953, 1872-06-24
ONE OR TWO TERMS.

1t has been the invariable custom in
Vermont to give the state officers two
terms. If they were faithful and eff
Gent in the first term the people express
ed their confidence and satisfaction in
them by reelection. A reelection has
been regarded the natural and proper
tribute to those who have done WE'LL
Vermont has not said to those who have
served her acceptably and honored in of.
fetal stations in their first term, well
done, good and faithful servant, now 60
home" She has not treated those who
have deserved well as if they had de-
served i'll, and were worthy only of dis
mission from their trusts She has given
them a reelection as the true and only
way of testifying appreciation of their
service and her own respect and honor
for them
We think the custom has been good
one 1t has trained and educated good
and intelligent and honorable class of
public men. 1t has been consistent with
the welfare and honor of the state
Some are now proposing to do away with
this custom. Because the election &C.
ours but once in two years, and there is
but one session of the Legislature in two
years, it is therefore said, 1--WE will sur
render the old custom of two terms of
office and have but one term. The faith
full servant shall have no reward. The
state shall have no advantage of the ex-
perience of tried men. Two terms will
consume four years and that is too long
for those who want office to wait. So
let us give up the two term principle and
adopt the one term rule"
The candidate and his friends who are
asking Vermont to change its time-hon-
ored usage, which has been so conducive
to the advantage of the state, and to the
self-respect and integrity and develop
ment of our public men, are, we think,
making grave mistake. We see no
reason why the uniform and healthful
system which has been conducive to the
political prosperity and prestige of the
state-which has been so acceptable to
our people-which has been so stimulat-
ing and useful to our public men by fur
nishing them natural reward for faith
full service, should be changed in the in
terest of an impatient craving for office.
Vermont has always been slow to change
where change was not manifestly neces-
sary and desirable. Her principle has
been, two terms, and not two years; a
reelection of true men as testimony of
appreciation, and not casting of them
aside after one term as If they were not
worthy of second trial of Office We
trust she will not change her political
habit where change will be SO obviously
injurious. We should be glad to see
the Republican party in the state unit
on this question. We have always re-
elected our Governors when they have
proved worthy of reelection. Why
should we GO back on usage SO honor
able to all concerned ?
We have been sorry to see in some quar-
tiers disposition to question Gov. Stew
art on account of his natural desire to
have renewal of that honor extended
to him which has never been refused to
his predecessors. Did any ever think of
retiring either Gov. Washburn or Smith
or Dillingham; or Royce or Page, after
the first term, in order to take the place
they occupied with credit to themselves
and honor to the state? In what is
Gov. Stewart their inferior? What
good reason exists for refusing him re-
election which existed not in other ca
ses? We do not believe that so eminent
and excellent man as our present gov
ernor is, will be denied the tribute he
merits, at the call of political impatience
and greed Wotchman.