The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1893-01-15
THE STREETS AND THE sPOILs sYs
TEN.

TENI
The Times welcomes any occasion that
gives Il an excuse TO return to the theme
| involved In the heading to this article.
1t is determined that the people Of Rich
mond shall understand the plan upon
which the money they contribute to street
improvement is dished out according to
the demands of politics instead Of being
spent according to an intelligent scheme
of general street improvement. If. after
understanding it, the people choose to
| allow 1t TO prevail, they have a right to
do so. But The Times intends that they
shall understand It, The Times there
fore gladly received and published yester-
| day, IBIS" rejoinder to its recent article.
There was very distinct point In con-
| tIoversy between The Times and "B"
when this discussion first commenced. but
we are not sure just what the Issue be-
| tween them now is. The plan for divid
| ing out street money is this: The Finance
| Committee appropriates, say $4,000. to
| streets. The Street Committee divides
| this into six parts and gives one-sixth 10
each ward The Times assailed this plan
as being a form of the "spoils system"
1t gives money where no street improve
ments are needed, and denies 1t where
| there is the greatest need for il. "B' re-
piled to The Times article defending the
system. At that point there was clearly
defined issue between us. The Times
NJ
| arguing in favor of the taxes contributed
by locality" being spent on that 10
cality," which was not exactly the point
in dispute. The Times answered this. and
''B" now replies, abandoning all defense
Of the system In use in Richmond and con-
tending that ii is our duty ito distribute
the street fund according to wards and
taxes paid" AS this would be a division
in proportion to contributions. 1t would
be as far from the system that prevails
here as London is from Lands End and
we see no reason. whilst making war on
Richmonds system, TO stop for a con-
troversy over this proposition. But, as
there seems to be nothing else now TO
COulIONtilt anu dS VIC w HOl dl ali agree
with "B" in this proposition, we will de-
vote a moments attention to it.
The essence of IBIS" proposition is that
justice requires that whatever is con-
tributed to government by locality"
shall be spent on that locality" Now,
we submit that the claim is in direct
antagonism TO the first principles OF social
order. Not only so, but, IL II were ac-
cepted as the true rule Of government, 1t
would make government and social order
impossible.
II we were in a state Of nature. with
no government over us at all, of course,
all taken from an individual would be
simply robbery. But as a state OF nature
when our forefathers tried 1t. was found
to be excessively inconvenient, they re-
solved upon going into a state of society,
with government over all. Money is alb
solutey necessary to the support Of gov
eminent. so that all who went into the
state of society agreed, and all now in
society agree, TO contribute a part of
what they have to a common fund. to be
used in maintaining and supporting gov
eminent for all. Every dollar contributed
to this fund is contributed with the i'm
piled understanding that it shall not be
used TO give one member Of society an
advantage over another. but that 1t shall
be used for the greatest advantage OF all.
Now. In cities. by common consent OF
those who contribute the money, improve
ment of streets is concluded to be one of
the objects upon which a part OF the
public money can be spent with great adj
vantage to all. This being so the only
question TO be determined is, how shall
that money be spent? Shall $500 Of II be
spent on Franklin street between the
Capitol Square and Bevidere, where not
a dollar OF 1t is wanted. or shall $500
be spent in draining a quagmire whare
Second street enters jackson ward. and
another $500 In Rockets. although
neither locality" contributes anything at
all7 The Times insists that the under