The Irish standard. [volume] (Minneapolis, Minn. ;) 1886-1920, 1896-01-11

suothed the existing ttl1 b1lienG spiIit p ts
lhaps his work would have been per-
formed as well as any other man could Q llS ao
| it but failing IN that the highest point q
efficiency was not to be expected. me y
city suffered.
stetson took the reins in his han q
once more year ago. He set Deiore
! himself the task Of bringing order out o.
chaos. It was not trivial undertaking
but he accomplished 1t. Harmony fol-
lowed. The men lost sight Of their blck
erings. They worked in. Unison, with g
will and with such results that the peo-
Die knew no mistake had been made IN
electing stetson. He not only restored
the department to efficiency but he won
the respect OF the men and retained u:
It is with regret it must be said that other
chiefs failed in this, either in whole or IN
part. 2
Taking all this into consideration why
should such an official be removed? 1t is
not because he is deficient, then why dis
place him? 1t is not because either OF
the other candidates is better equipped,
then why should they hold the place
There is no necessity for rotation IN Of
flee. 1t is not so much matter OF poll
ties. 1T is not case where one man
will do as we'll as another. It is matter
of security for the people, their nVes'
their property and their general security
from fire.
It is thought that Runge does not ex-
meet to be elected and that at no time
did he hold that opinion. But whether
or not, does he produce a better certihcate
than Stetson? Does he produce one as
good? He does not, and this can be said,
without harboring one detrimental
thought against him as man and cit
izen. Consequently Runge can be dis
missed without further consideration.
But as to Canterbury If any council
man or any citizen cam point to one quhai-
fication that he possesses for the office
1t should be known, Not hidden. lie mas
qualifications for some things and in Ger
tain directions but they in no wise per-
tain to the fire department. He was
known to be disturbing element when
he was member. He has genius for
disturbance. He lacks the faculty Of
controlling others and often lacks the
faculty of controlling himself. Was he
mot dismissed from the department for
cause? 1t may have been that the cause
was inefficiency or it may have been that
his nature contained too much Of the
spirit of friction for the comfort and we'll
being of his comrades, but whatever the
cause did not the dismissal take place?
Even supposing, for the sake Of argu-
ment, that he had been dismissed through
spite, or that some one else was anxious
for his place and got 1T, or, more remark
able still, II might have been thought by
his superior that his abilities were show
ing themselves to such an alarming ex-
tent as to make him dangerous as a. rival
AND Canter bury may always have this
as @ comforting solace-but no matter the
reason at present He has not proved
himself worthy. He may say he never
had chance and his friends may say his
ability is transcendant. It may all be
true in the face Of his former dismissal,
but it is doubtful-very--and the people
are mot ready this year to begin the
swapping of horses.
Let the c0unc.lmen cast a friendly vote
on the first ballot for their personal pref
erences. On the second ballot let them
think of the city and vote for Stetson.