New-York tribune., 1895-10-19
A GOOD GOVERNMENT QUESTION.

In n letter to the editor printed on another
page a correspondent who is presumably mem
Der of one Of the Good Government clubs seeks
TO Justify their course in running municipal can
didates OF their own instead OF supporting the
AntiTammany Union ticket.
If the necessary answers to all the questions
which our correspondent begs were just what
he seems to suppose, his argument would have
more weight than it now has plausbiy. The
fact is not. as the letter of Mr.. Nevus would
lead a wholly ignorant person to suppose That
Mr.. Platt has nominated for all municipal offices
from Mayor down candidates who If elected will
perform their various functions with an eye
single to his service, thus converting the entire
city government into Platt machine. The facts
are that the people are about to elect Register
a County Clerk and number of judges; mat the
Republican party, several ether political organ
izations and the Chamber Of Commerce nave
agreed to support certain persons for these
offices: that the reform administration Installed
last year Is to remain In power, whatever the
result Of the coming election may be; that IL
will be somewhat strengthened directly and IN
directly by the success OF the Union ticket. and
that the defeat Of that ticket would not merely
confirm Tammany in the possession OF those
fragments Of power which it still retains, but
would revive its hopes and stimulate its per
ncious activities. II the Union candidates win,
we shall have after January l for Register an
Anti-Tammany Democrat for County Clerk an
Anti-Tammany Republican and on the bench
several more competent and incorruptbe judges,
some Of whom are on the Good Government
ticket and not one Of whom is distrusted by any
Good Government club member. This Is not
I'm respect to any candidate or any principle IN
electoral contest which Is destined to affect Mr.
Platts authority, or the public estimate OF his
political character. The question is whether the
work Of destroying the Tammany system OF
government shall be completed or postponed
and made more difficult
Toward the end Of his letter our correspondent,
in that confident manner which always elicts
applause from those who are pledged to agree
with the person assuming 1t, asks this question:
"Why should we support an inferior ticket nom
"inated on 4 platform embodying every vclous
"principle of city government and already
doomed to defeat?' Now. Mr.. Nevius, do you
really think that the answer which you solicit
is conclusive? You expect your allies to reply
that there Is no reason why they should support
such a ticket, on such a platform and with such
induce others to accept your conclusion. But
wouldn't you have been more candid and quite
as persuasive If you had asked: 'Why should
we support ticket that is intrinscally no bet
"tcr than ours nominated on platform which
1--WE do not altogether like, and not certain 10
"be elcctedT' In that form your question would
have sufficiently indicated your preferences and
your state Of mind. and II would have seemed
honestly TO invite some such answer as this. that
you and others who profess to desire good gov
ernment ought TO support the Union ticket be-
cause il Is the only Anti-Tammany ticket which
can possibly be- elected; because. whether the
manner Of its nomination realizes your ideal or
not It practically represents the opposition to
that concrete evil which not completely
overthrown last year, and. If successful. will ac
complish the chief present purpose which You
say you have at heart. partly through your own
chosen instruments; whereas its defeat would
not only be Immediately and substantially in
furious to the public welfare but prejudicial TO
other interests which you regard as extremely
important.
This IT seems TO us, Mr.. Nevius, would have
been fair answer to fair question. The ques-
ton which you ask is irrelevant and the answer
which YOU dictate is vaueless.