The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1907-04-24
Mayor Bliss Makes Noise
Like a CrawhSh.

1t was not to be supposed that
Bliss would endorse the clean
sweep" idea. While each contended
that, in the interest of the public
good, the other should get out, neither
had the public good sufficiently at
heart to sacrifice the personal inter
est they had in retaining their offices,
and neither would voluntarily step
down and out, no matter what the
public good demanded.
Any suggestion that either should
sacrifice his personal inclinations in
the interest of the common good was
booted at, denounced as presumption
and high treason, and The Journal
constituted the main object of their
combined attack. The members of
the council made a great many wry
faces (not rye faces) at The Journal
and the mayor has written a letter
or two-maybe three-and one of his
letters appeared in these columns
yesterday morning.
In that letter Mayor Bliss under
takes to advise The Journal that its
'clean sweep idea is inconsistent,
and he gives his idea of what a ''clean
sweep" means, what The Journal
should have done in that matter and
how 1t should have done 1t.
This is an old game of the mayors.
He can always tell some one else
exactly what should be done and how
to do it; and when he gets into tight
place on one issue, he Immediately
proceeds to make a noise like a
crawish and discolor the water by
introducing a lot of other issues.
Unfortunately the mayor was not
consulted as to The Journals 'clean
sweep" idea. He may think it should
mean one thing, and he may wish
that it meant what he thinks it should
mean. But The Journal is not con-
cerned with what he thinks about it
or how he thinks the clean sweep"
campaign should be conducted.
The mayors long, loud and persist
ent contention was that the council
should be swept out. The Journal
and the people offered to meet him
half way and sweep the council out.
This was ali right, but when the
people indicated a desire to sweep
him out also, it was all wrong.
Thereupon the mayor plays the
crawfsh act He says the council
was not alone to blame. The city at
torney upon whose opinions the dis
agreements have been based" was as
that anyone had heard about the
city attorney. The mayors long wall
was of the council. put if the coun-
ellis disagreements with the mayor
were based on the city attorneys
opinions-the opinions of their legal
advisor, mind yoC-why, he (the at
torney) must have been at the bottom
of the whole trouble.
Strange that in all of his proclama-
lions and manifestos. wherein the
council was denounced and excoriated
the mayor never until now thought
about the city attorney.
Why does he now drag the city
attorney into it? Simply to cloud the
issue-the act of a crawfish attempt
ing 10 conceal his whereabouts and
blind his assailants.
And then he energies long enough
to throw a sop to the Avery voters by
telling them how consistent The
Journal would have been had it sup
ported Mr.. Avery for mayor. Natur-
ally the mayor can afford to talk nice
10 Mr.. Avery's friends just now-he
needs their votes-but we can only
surmise what comment he would have
made on The Journals consistency
had Mr. Avery instead of Mr. Ingra-
ham been his opponent in the second
primary.
The Journal, in the interest of the
common good, would have supported
Mr.. Avery just as it is supporting
Mr.. Ingraham-iust as it supported
the opponents of the old council
just as it is supporting Alex. Zelius,
the mayors friend, for the council
aow-just as it has been doing
for clean SIxAaD of the old council