Morning journal and courier., 1890-04-30
OPPOSING CONSOLIDATION.

Eeecher and Fire CommissiOner F.
 n. Farnsworth Argue Against a
 Union of City and Town.
 There was but a small attendance at last nights hearing of the court of common councils committee on consolidation.
 SeIectman Fleschner was the first speaker. He said he spoke with reluctance, as 1t was supposed that he was, previous to his election & selectman, a supporter of the consolida- tion measures. He said be had seen enough of town affairs since he was elected to be convinced that the chamber of commeroe's bill for consolidation was harmful rather than beneficial. As to the poor account, he said there is more red tape to go through before money can be obtained from the town than there is in the city government. It is almost impossible to ob- tain money from the town unless 1t is prop- erly due. The road and bridge account he spoke of at length. He thought 1t would be good idea to have improvements of this kind made by money obtained by general tax. The statements, many of them made by gentlemen in favor of consolidation, are erroneous. Suppose you have a nen-partisan board of charities and corrections. In the midst of hard winter the poor might starve while deadlock was being broken. We should have partisan boards, and the members should be appointed by the mayor. These boards should be as small as possible. As to supply Wes.ville and the Annex with fire engines. It would cost too much now Wait till the outlying districts want consoli- dation and they will be glad then to do their share in the matter. The people of the city itself, if allowed to vote on the question, would not decide that these outlying districts shall be taken in. They call the poor people of the town "the pauper vote." The same '.pauper vote" which is given work by the committee on outside poor of the town does the work of the city board of public works. Not one of those who have spoken for con- solidation are familiar with the details of the question and their arguments are found- ed mostly on hearsay. They are lame. In the town government an official can be im- peached for malfeasance of office at any time. In the city government you can do nothing and have to bear 1t for at least a year. There is no sentiment in the matter. It is question of praeticability and politics. oppose consol- idation politically and economically. He would not allow a man to be elected mem ber of the board of aldermen and then make deal and resign to be elected police com. missioner. He ethought it radically wrong.
 Ex-Selsctman Beecher spoke of the many bridges the town had paid for over the Westville streams. He said that with all his experience in town affairs he had never known a town meeting packed by a membe, of the board of selectmen. He thought il would be at least hundred years before consolidation would be satisfactory to all
 parties.
 Fire Commissioner Fred B. Farnswortt made an interesting argument against con. solidation. He thought it would be wise fol the friends of consolidation to turn theil energies towards improving the city govern
 ment and makeit so attractive that the outly.
 ing districts wouldwant to come in. People wht grumble most at our government are thos' , who are too lazy to attend town meetings ol , even ward caucuses The danger is not iron 7 town meetings but from these lazy peopl who wish to delegate their responsi | bilities upon others. It is ridicu lous to call the people of tn outside wards paupers simply becaus , they wish to manage their own affairs Yo,
 can never get scheme through the legisla
 turee for consolidation that prevents tho out 8 lying districts having something to say abou ' the matter. He thought the affairs of tn e school district were as wisely managed unde
 the present system as they could be unde