Delaware state journal. [volume] (Wilmington, Del.) 1870-1883, 1873-01-18
Delaware State journal.


Dividing New Castle County.
We publish elsewhere letter from Mr..
Samuel Townsend on the subject Of the
removal of the county seat from when
we infer that he is for some reason opposed
10 that measure, but as the communiea-
tlon lacks something of the directness
which usually eharacterizes the gentle
mans illusions We do not clearly under
stand exactly what he is in favor OF. lie
is angry with certain.parties in this city |
for not favoring his scheme for division |
Of the county at one time, but now that
the same parties appear inclined to accept
that scheme his letter indicates that he is
opposed to it.
We do not think he is quite consistent
In this matter, but we shall not critieise
him very severely for that since we think
that his present position on the subject of
county division is the right one. There Is
no sufficient reason why this county should
be divided that we know of. 1t is in ter
ritory the smallest county in the State.
Its population is no larger than that of
single counties adjoining it in Pennsylva-
mia, and there is no good reason why such
population should be saddled with the
expense of maintaining two sets of county
officers instead of one. Besides, just or
equitable division is impraetlcable. If It
were made on the basis Mr.. Townsend
suggests Wilmington county would still
have population much larger than either
Kent or Sussex, while New Castle county
would have less than either of them, so
that Just representation would not be
gained by it.
Neither would the Court House ques-
ton be settled by it, First because in case
Of division New Castle hundred or the
greater part of it would naturally form a
part of the upper county. But even If
this were divided and the county buildings
thrown into the lower county how long
does any one suppose it would be before
the people of that county would be clam
oriag, against the location of The county
seat at the extreme northern part of the
county, and demanding its removal to
NlluultAOMus N0A EhuNlh We bf pew
If Mr.. Townsend, himself, led the cry
Hence we see that neither of the questions
it's supposed, the divisions of this county
would set at rest would be permanently
settled by it, while the present population
would be put to the expense of supporting
two county governments where one woulC
do.
The whole matter is no.hlng,but an at
tempt to dodge the main question by those
who see It must be met, and yet fear Il
meet it. The question as to where tn
county seat should be, is one Of mere con
venience, and il ought to be at the poin
most readily accessible to the creates
number Of people This can be ascei
talned by the votes of the people, an
there is not the slightest call for diyidin
the county to settle ii. But the othe
question this proposition is intended t
settle is not mere question Of conven
fence, but is one Of right and Justice, an
cannot be settled justly or permanently b
the cumbersome and expensive process {
cutting county in two, but can be prof.
erly settled forever by people determinin
30 do what they know to be right an
Just, and voting to give the people of tn
city and county such number of Repr
sentatives in the General Assembly q
their numbers eniitlc them to.
And if they within connection with thi
establish tn. district system in the electiC
of members Of that body, we shall have
more truly representative Legislator
every hundred viii be represented by Il
kind of rcn its people think fitted to re
resent them, and Appointments will n
have to carry any old man of the sea
its shoulders for Wilmington, nor W
Wilmington perform a similar service
some representative of the minority
Approximately, and leave its major
voiccless in the Legislature. Comm
sense, their own protection in the futu
and decent regard for justice, will
more to settle this question Of represen
ton than all the county plitting eXpedieI
that can be devised from now till the &
of time.