The Wilmington daily Republican. (Wilmington, Del.) 1890-1902, 1893-04-10

An Emcient Police Ferce.
Tho reckless assertions made In I
democratic "Glasses" In the Sunday |
Star Of yesterday, may tickle the hood
lmm politicians amongst the Demo-
Gratis, but they certainly do not OBJ
tain much credit amongst well think
Ing people who exercise the faculty OF
thinking for themselves and forming
{heir own opinions. To the latter class
such stun is but empty vaporings and |
Hore 1t not that there are people liv-
1nQ beyond the city some OF whom
Are members OF the Legislature. not
understanding the reai situation who |
might believe these assertions, they I
would be unworthy of any reference
made to them. Democratic "Glasses'
says:
'sThe intent OF the present law was
10 make the police force non-partisan.
hut the result has been Just the con
fernry. Who can forgot the vile par.
usanshIp OF the police at tho last cleo
ton, and who can deny that they were
-WB00uhdG0a IL lhio 0ttlluao Wy lhp tiS-
publican members OF the police com
miesion? And as for Commissioner
Jester, does any self-respecting clti-
zen. Republican or Democrat, want to
see him continued In officer
We believe too that 1t was the intent
Of Judge Ball. Chief Swiggett and
others instrumental In framing the
present police commission bill. TO
make 1t non-partisan. II It has not
been strictly non-partisan in Its opera
lions whose fault wus it? Who ap-
pointed Jester and Lawson on the
force but John I. Dickey and Cover.
nor Reynolds. Who bargalned and
made deals to appoint a Democrat US
chief OF police but the appointees of
John I. Dickey.
4 Republicans had no say in the ap.
pointments. not even of the member
who was TO represent their own party.
Mr.. Dickey and Governor Reynolds
had the whole and sole management,
and how they must havo chuckle
with GleeHwhen they thought of the
solid Democratic police force, that
Jester and Lawson had agreed to APP
point. As for the question, docs
any eelf-respeuting citizen, Repuhll-
can or Democrat, want to see him,
(AIr. Jester) continued in Officer
Whatever MIR. Jester has been the
Republicans are not responsible. Had
they been consulted they would never
have thought OF recommending Mr..
Jester Not that he was not known as
Republican, but because he was
known as successful horse dealer,
who would not have the time nor the
inclination to attend to the details of
the Office. and what was of more i'm
portance he was not known to possess
the requisite qualities to make good,
substantial minority member Gas he
4 might be) of the police commission.
1t was left for Mr.. Diekey to discover
ihe good qualities that MIR. Jester pos
sessed to make what he thought would
DO a good Republican member OF the
board. Had Mr.. Jester stood by the
deal he made with Dickey and Lawson
to appoint Democratic police force
we would never have heari anything
OF his iucompetency to fill the position
OF a commissioner or OF his lncon-
stancy to his promises. But why
should Mr.. Jester be retained in the
board II he Is SO very Objectionable TO
the pure minded Dem ocrats and clear
sighted Dem ocratic "glasses;' The
{ Now -~--A-- i----- 49, r~-----tv -sr,avre
him II they wish to do so and appoint
another in his place. Why do they rot
do III .s#....
Mayor Wiley, who has also become
rs Objectionable to the Democrats as
Mr.. jester. will soon he out OF the
Board, any how, by the expiration of
his term Of Office, and then. as the
Dem ocrats nre so dead sure of electlng
the next Mayor, who will he mem Der
of the Board, they will have every
thing their own wny without the ap-
pointnent of new Police Commits.
mission. The Dem ocrats, however.
do not care about taking any stock
In tho next election, so far az 1t relates
TO the election of Mayor. They do
not want to depend upon any uncer-
tainties. They want to have a dead
open and shut gama that will give
them Democratic police force, and
for this purpose the Mayor has to be
eliminated from the Board. fearful
that he might be Republican.
And they want non-partisan police
force, so they say, hut that n-parti-
sanslip is shown in tho intention to
make Mr. L4Msop. who was as deep in
the Diekey-Jester deal as either of the
latter was, president of the new Com
mission. Here Is -pnrtisauship
with vengeance. Yes, Mr.. Lawson
and Mr.. Monaghan, under the dicta-
tion OF the Demo triumyirutc,
Dickey, Neary and Callahan, arc to ap-
point tho new non-partlsan police
force. This is richness beyond meas
ure.
But we are asked by the same
'.Ginsses:r who can forget the vile
partisanship of the police at the last
election, and who can deny that they
were encouraged in this attitude by
the Republican members of the Police
Commission? Vile craftsmanship! When
and where2 Can anybody tell2
This will indeed be news to both
Democrats and Republicans. Never
was there quleter election held and
II was rBre circumstance to see a
policeman at the polls except to vote
and then go away. The charge is
simply untrue. Never before did the
police take no interest in the election,
except to arrest drunken and disord
srly persons on the street as they did
at any other. II was not ths police
commissioners that armed twelve
hundred special Democratic con-
stables TO oyeraw and inttmldate lie.
publican voters. Partisanship in that
case was entirely on the other leg
This untrue SANDER OF the police
force and the Republican police com.
missioners 10 blatantly thrown out to
Influence the legislature in appoint.
Ing new police force. The charge is
an Infamous SANDER from end 10
end.