The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1899-11-01
A FAMILY QUARREL.

Inc blSpdtcn HfdheS ID very SERIOUS
charge against this paper. 1t declares
that the G l o e, either stupidity or will
fully, misconceives the origin, animus and
execution of the mayors order concern
ing sidewalk obstruction, and, following
the lead of the Pioneer Press, seeks to
place the burden of responsibility on the
OF course, wrong-as 1t always is. We
can find nothing in the shape of an effort
in the entire Dispatch article which comes
any nearer to sustaining this charge,
either directly or indirectly, than the
following sentences, which We amc st joy
fully quote, chiefly for the benefit of
Mayor Kiefer and his friends:
The mayor is a military person. and
his position as commandeF-in-chief of
the police force, being his first and near
est approach TO armed power, is one
of a division Of honors or a bestowal Of
confidence, even in his chief subordinate.
Therefore. the chief of police did not
know that the order was merely meant
to suppress fruit dealer who was &C.
cupying the sidewalk adjoining the prem
1SeS of a grocer who is a friend Of the
mayor, and he went ahead and obeyed
the mayors order. -'tf 80.
The Dispatch concludes this editorial,
which it so innocuously opens with it's
charge against the G b e, by warming
the mayor against ''the day of final reck-
oning,' which it declares is coming for
him.
The offense of the G l o consisted In
asking the mayor if he lurked behind his
personal organ. the Pioneer Press, in
charging all the, responsibility for the
criminal enforcement Of the sidewalk or
dinance on the police department. There
has been no answer to the Clio b e 8
query, unless the threatening onslaught
Of the Dispatch furnishes the answer.
That onslaught embodies a charge, as
the reader will see, against the official
character of Mayor Kiefer. 1t says in
SO many w~rds that he is abusing his pow
ers in the interest of a German grocer,
a friend of his, whose relative, we be-
lieve, is member of the present council.
and that his arrest of reputable mer-
chants has been effected, to drive off op-
petition to the business of his grocer
friend
The lilo e has already quoted this
charge in its columns on the authority
o. a Republican alderman. Is it neces-
ssry for the mayors party friends even
to charge him with being ID horse thief
before he will break silence?
The o b dsclairns all desire to in
ject itself into the family quarrels of our
Republican brethren. Why should we do
so? 1t may be true, as the Dispatch
charges, that the Pioneer Press and the
mayor are alike in the particular that
each Is for or against given public pol
icy only according as that policy helps
or hinders the selfish pecuniary ends of
/ the interests to which they are respect
lively devoted. This, of course, it is MOI our
province to deny or gainsay If the Dis
patch is right, 1t lies at least at the door
of Mayor Kiefer. We neither affirm nor
deny respecting the matter We confine
ourselves strictly to our original inquiry.
whether the mayor inspired the charge
OF the Pioneer Press against Chief Goss,
and, If he did, how he can defend his
conduct in allowing to remain in office
and in charge of the police department
man who has not hesi,ated to give him
the lie and set him at defiance and to pub
licly insult him by charging that he was
using his real property for gambling
purposes; who is in league with the may
or's enemies inside the party ranks, and
whom he evidently dares not dismiss,
for the good of the service" or other
wise, for fear of the wrath of those same
enemies