Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1883-07-11
TO Whom Ii May Concern.

THE Lancaster INrELLIGENCER likes the gov
ernor's vetoes and it doesn't like them; Inc
governors "confidentia! cnunse,ors sa1n,u d,nrs
of the NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. fWrto.
The INTELLIGENCER people remind us
Of the criticism once passed on Senator
Edmunds that he could sec fly on barn
door, but not the door r-Ptttsburyh Post.
The Patriot and the Post both claim
and hold a leading position among the
Democratic newspapers of Pennsylvania.
That position, no less than what the
p,st calls honorable party fidelity"
should suggest to them the propriety OF
dealing fairly with their comptempora-
ries as well as Justly with the governor
whom their party elected. Had they
been disposed to tell the whole trlth
about the INTELLIGENCER and its atti
tude TO the governor vetOes, the
Patriot would have said that this jour
nal, in what it has tried to make dis
eliminating and intelligent reviews Of
them, has given its cordial and
ungrudging appreciation to most OF
them; and, concerning the manner
in which this power has been exercised.
it has said: s. The honesty of purpose
and the pains taking intelligence with
which the present governor has generally
bent to this task cannot be disputed. Its
influence will he felt for great good upon
the action of future Legislatures and he
wisdom of his confidential cOunsellOrs
who have aided his deliberations has
served him and the commonwealth
WE'LL" The Post, too, if it were disposed
to tell the whole truth, would not have
intimated that this journal fails to do
justice to the excellence of most of the
vetoes, while it preserves its own self
respect by criticising those which do not
commend themselves to it's honest iudg
ment.
The INTELLIGENCEH hardly nee'ls t"
repeat what it has so often tried to
make plain, that it entertains no such
view of honorable party fidelity rs
to feel it incumbent upon public jour
nal to give unqualified cOmmendatiOn to
every act which the officials elect of its
party perform. We do not hold public
servants to be the Oracles of their party
nor above the criticism Of its newspa
pers. On the other hand, every editor
who has the public good and even
the party advantage in clear vision will
strive to so further both-and they
ought to he identical, for the policy
which is the best for the common veal
is best for the party--that when
the action of public officials is
not in line with them it will
be fearlessly criticised. The spirit
of undiscriminating defense and praise
of ofliceholders, which prevailed for so
many years in the Republican party,
bred first bossism and then disintegra
tion.
In the case which has evoked the criti
cism of the Post and Patriot, the INTEI.
L1GENCER suggested a certain incon
sistency in the governors vetoes of some
of the charity appropriations and his
approval of the many others. The Post
admits that "he may make mistakes. -
This was one of them. Would the Post
have us ignore or deny it {? The Patriot
apparently agreed entirely with us in
the opinion that the governor should
have drawn "the line at the recommen-
dation of the board of public charities"
or in other words " withheld his apprO
val from such appropriations as were not
applied for in compliance with law. "
And it commended his veto under the
mistaken impression, presumably, that
he had done so; whereas he had not
hence our criticism.
When the music is such that we can
not consistently keep step to it, we try to
reform the music.