Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1882-02-23
CITY Government.

lily UOvCFUIQcuJs
The growing independence of popular
sentiment, manifested in this and other
cities of the commonwealth at the annual
municipal elections, cannot fail to bring
the people of the larger cities more and
more into sympathy with movements to
eliminate party politics from municipal
affairs. There is no reason under the
sun why the affairs of any municipality
or local government should be admins
tered upon partisan basis. The police
control of a city, the supply of water,
the improvement of streets, the raising
of money and its disbursement, are mat
ters with which state and ma
tional politics have no relation what
ever. The views of mayor, police
or other city officers upon question of
state or national concern have nothing
at all to do with their municipal func-
tions, except as they exercise them in be-
half of their party at general elections
and this is the thing which every good
local interest demands that they should
not do. But just SO long as they have
to depend upon party elections, so long
they will be more or less party officials.
and in sheer self-defense they will have
to lean more upon their party and less
upon the confidence of the whole people
than they ought. While the present lines
are tightly drawn faithful officials
will not receive from the opposing party
that appreciation and support which they
earn by proper discharge of their
duties and faithless officials will receive
an encouragement and defense from
their own party which they do not merit.
The experience of all parties shows that
it is difficult to get the right kind of
men to stand as candidates for local
Offices, and especially for the unremu-
nerative places of councilmen, because
they know they will get little credit for
doing their duty and that they will be
expected to use their places for the bene-
fit of their party.
There is no city that We know of in
which there are better opportunity and
more abundant reasons for the expert
ment of a non-partisan city government,
for the public good, than Lancaster. 1t
is very evenly balaneed between the two
parties and although badly gerrymand,
cred against Il fair Democratic represen-
tatiOn in councils, experience has shown
that with hard work one or both
branches may he controlled in favor of
that party while SO long as the De-
mOcracy furnish it with such mayor
as it has given the city now for the
third time, it may fairly claim the power
tokeep control of the executive depart
ment of Lancaster. Under these Cir
cumstances neither party would have
anything to lose and the city
would have much To gain from
a movement heartily entered into
and faithfully carried out by all parties
to relieve every department from party
control or responsibility. OF course this
could only be done 10y general assent, and
we believe all parties are SO sick and
tired of the annual squabbling and
wrangling over petty offices to be willing
to enter into it. 1t certainly would not
be disadvantagcOus to any Republican,
as such, to elect a mayor like Mr.. Mac.
Goniglc on a nOn-partiSan ticket, any
more than Democrats, rs such, would
suffer from the like election of such
cOuncilmeIras as Mr.. Robert A. Evans. 1t
would he very well if ;,ll the wards were
represented by men as fit to represent
them as Mr.. Middleton or Mr.. McMullen
and, for the sake of example, it would
be much better if 4 ward like the Sixth
could have both Mr.. d. G. Baker and
Mr.. VIM. johnson in councils, than that
its people should be convulsed with 4
contest between them for place which
neither desires and in which either
would be highly acceptable to all classes
of citizens were he elected to represent
all classes.
We know Of no reason why this thing
should not be done right here and now.
1t will never be done if postponed until
just before local election when party
lines are tightly drawn and the issues
shaped by partisan interests. Now is the
accepted time.
The Match Tax.
The most impudent thing which has
been heard for some time is the protest
of some of the rich and powerful match
manufacturers against the proposed re-
moval of the one cent per box stamp tax
on matches:
Mr.. VIM. H. Swift, ,sOf the firm of Swift,
Courtney & Beecher, match manufacture
ers. of Wilmington, DEL, in an argument
before the sub committee of the House
committee of ways and means, urged that
the match manufacturers Of tho country,
without exception, are in favor of retain
ing the stamp. The business has grown
L