The Washington critic., 1886-03-23
WASHINGTON. MARCH 90, 1886.
THE DUTY OF THE SENATE.

If the Senate desires to do an act of
simple justice to the people of the Dis.
trict of Columbia, 1t will take the very
first opportunity that presents itself and
emphatically reject the nomination of
Mr.. Matthews of Albany to be Re.
corder of Deeds. Mr.. Matthews is pre-.
eminently of Albany with which city
all his interests have heretofore been
connected. The Office of Recorder of
Deeds is pre.eminently of the District
of Columbia, with which the interests
of the residents thereof are most init.
matcly connected. The question is
one neither of race nor necessarily of
politics Neither need be brought into
consideration in the matter. The Dis.
trict Democrats feel that they have
just claims to the place, but even these
claims they are ready to set aside If
such sacrifice be needful In order to
vindicate the principle of home rule.
The question as thus presented Is
purely a question of the rights of II Ger.
tain portion of the people of this coun,
try.
The people of the District of Colum.
bia are rs much attached to their homes
and the family associations that have
grown around them as are the people
in those sections where they have the
right to vote. They have as great
desire to see the local offices filed by
local men of known ability aud who
are interested in common with them as
have the people of Boston or Balti.
more to have Boston or Baltimore men
in charge of their municipal affairs.
Neither is there any point in the
claim that because one-half of the cX.
penses of the District are paid by Con.
gress there is nothing wrong in ap.
pointing an outside man to be Recorder
of Deeds. Without further asserting
the undeniable right of the District to
home rule, attention is called to the
fact that the Recorder of Deeds is not
paid from any portion of the funds of
the United States but by the fees of his
Office, aud these fees come from the
pockets of residents of the District. 1t
is indeed difficult to see how any reas.
enable person can hold that other than
District man is justly entitled to the
position. 1t Is very strange how the
President could have done the injustice
to the District that he put upon it by
the nomination of Mr.. Matthews, or
why he has persisted in that injustice.
He may have been misinformei, but
he ought to know by this time that Mr..
Matthews, no matter how good man
he may bc-and we believe he is most
competent gentleman-is not the right
person to be Recorder of Deeds. AS to
the political argument that the ap.
pointment of Mr.. Matthews will have
great influence in swinging the colored
vote over to the Democratic party, it is
not worth talking about. If colored
men are to be appointed to Office fol
partisan purposes, they should be sen
TO places VIII ere their services would
possess certain campaign value. They
can be of no great avail in disfran
chised community-certainly not Of
sufficient avail rs to warrant the insult
to our people that is involved in send
ing an Albany man to Washington tc
= fill an Office that is peculiarly theil
own
The Senate, we trust and believe, will
put the matter in shape by rejection
of the Albany nomination.