Waterbury Democrat., 1901-03-20

[The Hartford Times, few nights ago, pitched into Bryan for opposing the election of Rolla Wells, as mayor of St Louis. The Commoner, MT Bry- ans paper, ill the following article, tells why such men as Wells should not be placed at the head of the dem- ocratic party.J
 It is fortunate for the democracy of the nation that at the very beginning of the fight the reorganizers furnish a sample of the harmony which they recommend to the party at large. St Louis, the chief city Of one of the great democratic states, is chosen as the theater for the exhibition of this model reconciliation! A mayor is to be chosen who will hold office during the worlds fair ,and certain men who did not think it important that the ma tion should have a democratic presi- dent are convinced that it is a matter of paramount importance that St Louis should have a democratic mayor. Of course it was thought necessary that so important an office at so important a time should be filled by a man of eminent responsibility" but it is strange that among the many thou- sands in St Louis who are in the habit of voting the democratic ticket, not one could be found who measured up to the standard set by the reorganizers.
 Rolla Wells, the gentleman who was nominated by the democratic city con- vention, renounced his allegiance to the democratic party in 1896 and re- signed the presidency of the St Louis Democratic club. He actively co-op- erated with the bolting contingent who supported the republican ticket that year. and in 1898 he openly opposed the democratic candidate for congress in his district. In 1900 his influence was given to the republican national ticket. and he has not since that time returned 10 the democratic partR. or announced his acceptance of demo cratic principles as set forth in the party platform. ,-'zt
 The resolutions adopted by the local convention which nominated him in clude an endorsement of '.the funda- mental principles of democracy" but MT Wells, if elected. will be able to dehne and conStrue those principles to suit himself. -
 | ,Mr Wells is personally, no doubt a good man. According to the. Rep,1b- lie. MT Carpenter of the, National Lead company, republican,. gives Mir Wells certificate of good character, and MT Walsh of the Terminal Railroad company endorses the certificate. Even the Globe-Democrat, cannot withhold it's testimony to his responsibility.
 It may be that the situation in St Louis is such as to make it necessity to disregard party lines, but if such is | the case,4 the candidate should run as q non-partisan or as an independent. MT Wells has been 5affectionately de- scribed by his friends as "a man who can win,' but what if he can win? It would not be fair to hold the demo- cratic party responsible for the admin lstrat1on of man who, by his own act. severed himself from his party and repudiated its principles.
 l A party must have principles as well as an organization, and national convention is the proper body to de clare those principles. If, after plat form is adopted, any member cannot conscientiously support that platform he has perfect right to leave the par ty, and no one can justly criticise his action if he is honest with himself and with his party. But a man cannot be l outSldC oL party Slltl dC tHe same time. Those who remain inside the party have rights as well as those who desert it. They have right to insist that any one who leaves his par. ty and opposes it's platform and can. didates shall return in some open and formal way before he can again con- sider himself a member. It is not enough that Mir Wells condescends to accept the nomination and q chance of election to an important office; that is merely an acceptance of q benefit from q party which he repudiated and spurned. Before he. is entitled to be called a democrat he must in some way. manifest his willingness to ac
 cept the party's principles. He may think it humiliating to return to the party, but is it not more humiliatins for the party to surrender to him?