Springfield daily republic. [volume] (Springfield, O. [Ohio]) 1887-1888, 1888-03-28
THE PROPOSED PLAN.
A Very Able and Convincing Article Con-
csrning Reconstruction by John
q. Thomas, Esq.
The Poin Is of the Plan Presented and
Argued in Detail-True Non -Psrti-
sanism the Means of Good Gov
ernment For the City.

ND6t was Sdlu anu uOht
The clear, pointed and compre-
lensive statement made by Judge
White, in favor of the advance
and the plan, were to me completely
No better presentrtion of
the matter was possible, and think it must
have carried conviction to every man who
was open to conviction.
Every reason in favor of the movement
was convincing, and fully sustained by the
experience of men who know something
about city governments. So thoroughly
were these statements that no
attempt was made to assail them, or to
answer them.
There, however, was some opposition to
the movement, and so far as it has devel-
oped itself, it consists mainly in two points:
One made by Mr.. Mcdonald, and the other
by Mr.. Rawlins, at the Monday night meet
ing.
Mr.. McDonald's opposition was solely on
the ground that there was inequality in tax
alton, without assigning single reason for
1t. He did not give single reason which
mad any connection with the subject in
hand. He uttered not word to show that
the present plan was good, or that the pro-
posed plan was bad. All that Mr.. Melon
aid said, would have been just as appro-
pirate il the subject had been mad dogs in
stead of that of new city government. He
made no point against it either with reason
or without reason. 1t was simply blank
cartridge fired in the air.
In reply to his statement about the inc
qualities of taxation, need only to repeat
what was so well said by MIR. Arthur at the
meeting on Monday-that if there are in
equalities in taxation, they exist under the
present plan, and cannot by any stretch of
imagination even be attributed to the new
plan.
But with Mr.. Rawlins it was different.
He has objections to the new plan and he
stated them fully, and which, when divest-
ed of all verbiage, is simply because the
new plan did not propose to give the re-
publican party the paid officers. He was in
favor of reform, If partisans of his party
could draw the salaries. But he was against
reform If anybody else was to draw part
of the salaries. If the salaries were to go
to men who would give their time and at
tention to the duties Of their office instead
of to politics, then he was opposed to the
plan. In short, he was not in favor of
anything which would take single salaried
officer from the republican party. no matter
how much good might be accomplished by
1t. This is a square issue, made by one
who exalts partisan politics above the gen
eral good, which is no doubt satisfactory to
him, and those who think with him. But
to those who want good government as the
chief thing, it is not satisfactory. 1t is not
only not satisfactory, but 1t Is wrong.
That do not mis-state his position, is ev-
ident from the fact that he was willing to
have the police and fire commissioners non
partisan, which draw no salary. Ii 1t was
not for the sake of the salary in the board
of public works, that he was after, why is
he willing for the other boards to be non
partisan? The fire department and police
boards will spend about as much money as
a board of public works; will be under
fully as great responsibility, and Will have
duties to perform equally important Ii
two non-partisan boards will be good
thing, then why Will 1t not be better
thing to have them all non-partisan?
There seems to be no escape from this
conclusion: that either all will be better. or
none will be better, by reason OF being
non-partisan.
1t would be beneath the dignity OF the
republican, or any other party, TO allow
itself 10 be planted on any such ground.
And do not believe that the republican OF
any other party will permit itself to be
placed there in this issue. There are con-
siderations above party needs and above
party ability to perform; and there is
good beyond the highest party reach, rest
ing with the people as common citizens,
and which they should not allow any con-
siderations of mere party TO hazard OF
defeat.
Such cause is presented now in this
movement for reform; originating above
party, approved irrespective of party, and
it ought to be carried without the interfer-
ence of the party lash. Will it be done?
1t rests with the thoughtful people TO de-
termine.
l am not urging this matter because of
any personal advantage which will accrue
to me more than to any other citizen. My
age will prelude me from assuming any
position in the new government. If OBJ
tanned, and desire none, either with or
without pay. l have no pride or ambition
at stake in this issue. Nothing involves
me in the movement, aud out of it. moth
ing will evolve to me, but the comforts of a
good and satisfactory government for our
people.
Why should We wrangle over single
feature OF the prosed plan, which has no
importance whatever TO the majority of the
people, when it embraces SO many other
good points, which outweigh. thousand
fold, these inconsiderable things, over
which the issue is made?
To my mind, the nnn-partisan features
are not only desirable but necessary to the
full and complete development and enjoy
ment of this new plan. If the plan will be
good without them, it will be better with
them, and sooner or later, the people will
see it in this way.
This plan may be defeated now by the
active partisans, but it will not stay beaten.
Sober thinking people will regard ii as a
better thing to have man in city Office