Staunton vindicator. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1860-1896, 1876-04-14
THE vINDIoAToR FOR THE CAMPAIGN.
THE NECESSITY OF A REFORM
IN THE CITY GOVERNMENT.

u
IN THE CITY GOVERNMENT.
We pin our faith, with everybody else
in Virginia, on the Conservative party for
government and protection. but we hold
also that that party must recognize its
duty to furnish the best government and
protection that is at its command. To do
this it requires from all it's members con-
fidence and active cooperation, and then
we can fairly hold it responsible for the
government it furnishes. For four years
it has been indifferentto Staunton city
elections, and we propose to show some of
the results. For the squandering of the
public money; for the disgraceful condition
of the streets; for the injection of the
Radical element into prominent city Of
fees, and for a drifting into certain sort
fpersonalgovernmen who is responsible?
Suppose the effort to pay HAMBLETON
Bros. 100000 for water-works that have
only cost $4,000, and for which enormous
bid Messrs. EVANS. abby and WlTz
fought SO persistently to the last, where
could the city have looked for satisfaction
for the $4,000 sunk? In the case of the
$4,000 paid WITz & HOLT for useless
property. where can the city look to get its
money back? Ip the case of the 5000
Chesapeake & Ohio r.. R. lots, gift from
the city to that corporation, who is going
to reimburse the people for the loss caused
by no stipulation put in the deed that the
ground should be returned il not used in a
certain time, and for the purpose it was
given? Suppose the six Councilmen had
succeeded in throwing the whole cost of
the Main street improvement on the city,
as they tried to do, who could the voters
of Staunton have held responslbleY Not
the members Of the Council personally.
The advantage of a party organization is
that it holds such reckless legislation in
check. IF members of one party commit
these blunders and excuses their party
fails of success at the next election, and
chance is given to get better govern
ment, but as it has been in Staunton for
four years past, the elections, such few as
have been made by the people, were conduc
ted on the personal popularity IF the candi-
dates and resulted in all sorts of personal
tirely irresponsible to the people. Nothing
so soon results in bad government as ir-
responsibility. You can't hold the in
dividual responsible for his bad legislation:
you must hold the party for it. The Con-
sentative people now have the power, the
provocation, and the necessity to resume
the control of the city government Of
Stanton. Let us look at the necessity
On the 5th of August, at a full meeting
of the Council, it was resolved to improve
Beverley (Main) street from Market to
Lewis street, at a cost of $s,04e, the ex-
pense, which amounted in the end to
$9,s26, to be divided equally between the
city and the property-holders along the
line. The work was undertaken by Mr..
Alois Rick, contractor from Richmond,
under the supervision of Mr.. Donald AL
len, City Engineer, and had progressed
nearly to completion when, on Tuesday,
Nov. Sd, three months afterwards, just as
the assessments on the property holders
for their half share of the expense was be
ing made up, Mr.. VIM. H. German Offered
a resolution resembling the former resolu-
tion by which the property holders were to
pay one-half, and ordering that they should
only be required to pay on the old style,
that is, two-ffths only for the side-aoaM
The vote on that proposition stood as
follows:
Ayes. Noes.
BICKLE. abby.
EVANS. BURKE.
GORMAN. KAYSER-3
HOGE.
FUNKHoUsER.
WITz-6
Notwithstanding the fact that this out
rageous piece Of legislation to shift the
burden of debt from private property hold-
ers on the Taxpayers at large, en-
tailed an expenditure out of the city
treasury of several thousand dollars, and
required seven votes to make it legal, the
President of the Council, Mr.. RoBT. G.
BIcKLE, declared it passed with only six
votes. Under the half-and-half principle,
as was first adopted, the gentlemen
above named would have had to pay the
sums put opposite their names, as follows:
r.. G. Bickle $536.l2
Isaac Witt ,xo 40
Witt & Hole A"'1"
John Ii. Evans 1O2.72
M. p. Funkhouser ...::........ 63.95
r. B. HOge 1890
(fHOge & BrO.)J
Instead of these figures they, by their
own votes reduced their share down
to the following figures, the cleared"
amount being thrown on the people of