The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1875-05-27

EDIToR TELEGRAPH lin last week issue
of the Telegraph, in the local columns, |
noticed short article headed "The munich
pal expenses" in which the writer seeks to
criticise in rather fault finding spirit the
action of the Common Council in the APP
pointment of a suitable person 10 care for,
flighs aud extinguish the street lamI s. 1t is
true that Mr.. JOHN G. Buddle offered to do
that duty and also to act as night watch for
the sum of 81 per month A lihe offer was
made by Mr.. Thomas Hunt for the discharge
of the same duties. The objection urged to
the appointment Of either OF these men, or
in fact to the appointment of any enc man
to act in the double capacity of night watch
and TO light, extinguish and care for the
street lamps was tAis; That professional
burglars are generally conceded to be pref
ty sharp shrewd men, and would know the
whereabouts Of your night watch at any
given Eour of the night, aud especially if it
was made his duty at given hour to extin-
guish the lamps. The discharge of that
duty would occupy lis time from one and q
half to two hours, and in that very part OF
| the night when burglars and that class of
gentry would be most likely to be on the
alert for job. Your night watch in the
mean time may be engaged with his lamps
IN one extremity of the city, leaving your
burglar free ard fearlessly to operate in any
other portion Of the city. This conceive
to be good and valid objection 30 coupling
those two duties together. The object of q
night watch is for the protection Of the citi-
zen in the enjoyment of his life and property
from the depredations Of these night PROV
lers, and the person appointed to the dis
charge Of that duty should be left free and
untrameled from the discharge of any other
duty, and especially from duty that will
necessarily take him TO the most remote
part of the city and that too at fixed hour
of the night Aside from these general OBJ
iections to combining these two Roffices in
any one man, still another objection exists
as TO the appointments of Mr.. Buddle. Mr..
Buddle already holds the office of Street Su-
pervisor CT the lst and Sd wards of the city
which. if he discharges his duty in that ca
pacity, will necessarily occupy ell his time
during the day, and the council very proper
| ~ Gin my judgment) thought to impose both
these duties upon any one man, would in
volve the necessity of the neglect of one or
the other and probably both.
Now as regards the appointment of q night
watch. If it is thought necessary 10 have
one at al, it is equally necessary that the
person appointed should possess qualifca-
tious adapting him TO The discharge of the
duties of that position. He should he per-
feetly reliable, efficient and fearless and
the city can hardly expect TO obtain the
services of such man for less than $50 per
month.
Opinion is of course divided as to the nee
essity OF having night watch at all, but a
majority of the council, and as l believe
majority of the citizens concur in the opin-
ion that it is necessary. This Is evidenced
from the fact that the merchants and princi-
pal business men Of the city have at their
own expense employed man to act in that
capacity. And, as / understand, they have
done so with the expectation. if not the I'M
Outstanding, that the city should alse employ
q man. The appointment of the person for
that place, was by resolution Of the council
left with his Hon. the Mayor to make at a
salary not exceeding $50 per month.