The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1903-09-19
NADAL REPLIES TO JEROME.
HIS ANTI-LOW BLAST CALLED
SHALLOW AND insufficient.
what Ii the Test for the Mayoralty. Capacity
or Good FeIlowship?-And wouldn't
the Voter, He Asks. Resent the Turning
Down or . Good Mayor rs Foolish!


the Voter, He Asks, Resent the Turning
Down OF . Good Mayor rs Foolish!
C. c. Nadal of the Citizens Union, to
whom District Attorney Jerome addressed
his letter crticising Mayor Low. replied
to Mr.. Jerome yesterday as follows:
Sept 10, 1908.
My DEAR JEROME: Your letter OF the
18th inst, doubtless through some over
sight, was not mailed to me until the day
after it had been given to the newspapers
l thought that the letter hardly needed
reply, but to-day ! see further statement
in tho papers from you along the same
lines will venture to point out what
seems to me to be the fundamental error
in your position.
| need no assurance Of your sincerity
and the disinterestedness of your mot ives.
You can rest assured that those who know
you will take no stock in the insinuatlon
that you are influenced by some alleged
disappointment or personal ambi' ion.
As understand your post ion, it ia that
Mr.. Low should not be nominated because
he cannot he elected, and you assume hat
he cannot be elected because you think
he is unlovable, egotis ical, sele-complacent,
timid, lacks sense Of humOr, that he has
no LOT ledueTsIllp dIlu ~
I have endeavored to state your propo-
sit ion fairly. Have rot done 40?
Now. observe the position In which the
Citizens Union would inevitably be placed,
IT, for the reasons you have given, It should
fail to renominate Mr.. Low. The real
friends OF good government in this city,
including yourself, assert that Mr. Low
it has ever had. Suppose we should re-
fuse to renominate Mr.. Low, Would not
the Citizens Union be at once placed in
position which would require explanation,
II not apology? Would not the voters OF
this town rightly and fnir Y say, "Why have
YOU refused to continue In office the man
who has given the city the best admins
ration it has ever had?'
Our answer would he: we have not
nominated him because we believe no
would not get tho votes Of the people OF
this city, and that he would not get those
votes because he is unlovahle, egotistical
self-complacent, timid, lacks sense o.
humor, and has no capacity for leadership.
Would not the voter then have perfect
right to say that the reasons given for cur
action are an insult to his intelligence and
his civic patriotism? Would he not have
q right TO say. "Do YOU take me for fool
that In select ng the Mayor of this great city.
| allow questions Of his lovableness. his
egotism, his sef-complacency, his timiditv,
his sense of huinor or capacity for leader.
ship to control my vote? Am | so devoid OF
common sense that I would ignore this
mans record in tie Office which he has oc-
cupied for two years, and allow myself
to be Influenced by these purely personal
considerations, that do not in any way
affect his usefulness as public servant?
Would not such an inquiry be fair one.
and would we have any answer to make
except the simple one. Yes you are fool,
arI
not be trusted to cast your vote lntelli-
gently, and, therefore, we have turned
down the man who has given you the best
administration the city has ever had. and
have put up a man who is without e3-
perience in the Office of Mayor, whore capac-
ity to fill the office is unknown. but who Is
a Jolly good fellow who is sugarcoated
with sense of humor. and il, therefore,
thought to be popular?
If should accuse you of being influenced
in casting your vote by your personal likes
and llislikes for the candidate rather than
by his actual capacity TO fill the office as
shown by his record, would you not think
and your integrity? Surely you would.
Then by what right has the Citizens Union
| to cast reflection upon the intelligence
, and integrity Of the voter at large by as
Stunning the very same thing as to him?
, II we should follow the lines Of action
suggested by your letter, cannot see how
we could fail 70 reach exactly this point
| Indeed, our position would he a triAe worse.
| The intelligent voters of this town would
| not believe that we We're honestly stating
! our reasons for turning down Mr., ow
They would he justified in saving that the
exclamation is shallow and insufficient
/ ard that there must re sone other reas' n
which 20 are aftail to disclose.
| What you say about the leaders in the
| dist let's and the members Of the Union