Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1876-04-26
The Democratic Party and the City
Debt.

party in Watertown for the past TWEEN.
ty years, with reference TO its method
of dealing with the city debt In the
space then devoted to the subject we
could not of course, cover the entire
ground, and point out all the mistakes
intentional and otherwise, made by that
party during the last two decades. To
do this would require column or two
every day in the week, and every week
IN the year. Our purpose was merely
to designate in a general way some of
the more glazing instances of blunder-
ing, and we cited the action of the
party as regards ex-Mayor John W.
Cole, ex-Mayor w. M. Dennis, and
ex-Member of the Assembly, Daniel
! Hall, as cases in point The Water
town Democrat as in duty bound, last
| week attempted defence of its party
by replying to our article, but was
compelled to make the following ad-
mission. It said: "We are not 60
ing to dispute the value Of the SER
vices of these gentlemen, but gladly
admit all that can be said in their
| praise, in this respect"
| Very we'll Here then is point
not only settled, but gained by us, for
the Democrat comedies all that we
claimed, which was that when its par
ty exigencies seemed to require it, good
and useful men have always been sacri-
fed on the Democratic altar. But,
says the Democrat, "Mr. Cole owed
his election to Democratic votes" It
is true that MI. Cole received demo-
cratic votes, but he was opposed by the
whole force and power of the demo
cratic organization, SO far as they could
be welded in behalf of the democratic
candidate. All the democratic ma
chinery that it Was possible to put in
motion against Mr.. Cole was used, but
unsuccessfully cy reason of the stand
taken by independent democrats who
would not be bound and gagged into
the support of the caucus nominee.
So the democratic party can claim no
credit for the election Of Mr.. Cole.
With reference to Mr.. Dennis, the
Democrat is equally candid and makes
the following concession
Mr.. Dennis was elected Mayor twice
in succession, aud defeated for third
nomination. During his two terms he
served the city with zeal and ability,
used his influence to purchase what
bonds could then be procured at the
low price asked, and in all respects
discharged his whole duty so well and
faithfully that his retirement was gen.
orally regretted, as it might interrupt
the prudent and wise policy he was
pursuing in regard to our city debt.
He had the support aud confidence of
the large class OF Democrats who have
always been in favor of settling the
city debt, on fair and just terms, and
that class has always composed the
majority of the party, and does now.
Who was responsible for the ere
tirement" of Mr. Dennis, which was
SO generally regretted" The Demo
cratic party. Why was he not con-
tinued in the Mayors Office, if he
served the city with so much zeal and
ability, and his administration was SO
satisfactory? If he had 1.-THE support
and confidence of democrats" as
claimed, why did they reduce him to
the ranks? Is that the way for par
ty to show its support and manifest its
confidence in a vigilant and useful
officer? Now, We undertake: to say
that if the. democratic party, which
alone had the power to do it, had re-
elected Mr.. Dennis and kept him in a.
Mayor for FIVE years, Watertoaon scoulo
mot have any city debt today, because
he would have settled it "by the prs
dent and wise policT he was pursuing
in regard to it," when he was relegat
ed to private life. And that this wa.
not done there is no reason except tina
the politicians in that party whe
managed its affairs, cared less for tn,
> interests of the city, than they did t,
satisfy the demands of partisans il
their ranks who were greedy for Office
As regards Mr.. Hall, and the abilit,
! and fidelity with which he discharged
his duties when il the legislature, tht
Democrat gives IN expression of M
Il