The Pensacola journal. (Pensacola, Fla.) 1898-1985, 1913-01-26

ment TO adopt, is not only a phenone-
ron in American politics. but wholly
unnecessary, and does not accord with
the stern and positive doctrines of a
Ieffersonian democracy. and an in
fringement upon the representative
system.
Notwithstanding We have been urged
upon to write this our views upon the
above subject, we feel that we are not
sufficiently versed in the anatomy Of
civil government to dlssect the present
form so strongly advocated by our OPP
ponents, nor do we believe that any
change they may make, or departure
from the moorings of the republican
system will improve OF throw better
safeguard around the interest and well
fare Of the people.
We are in favor Of reforms when
reforms are needed, but in favor OF
them on correct, constitutional lines.
and do not endorse any that deprives
the masses of the right to say. who
shall fill the functions OF government.
Having from an historical standpoint.
moderate, temperate knowledge OF
governments from the inception OF an
imperial dynasty to a free untra mneled
representative one, we cannot as a
long life democrat. support theory.
the novelty of which we fear Will re-
coil upon the principles of true de-
mocracy.
The proposition to place the appoint
ing power into the hands of three COM
missioners is perniciois and danger
GUS. and they who support it, will some
day long to return to the present form
or sing their last song like the dying
swan before giving up its lingering
hope for a return to life
The democrats of this age have taken
the stand they are opposed to trusts,
corporations and monopolies, and here
is an attempt on the part of the advo-
Gates of a commission form, to ride
the people, with a most gigantic nu-
nicipaI monopoly on their backs into
power, that win place twenty eight or
thirty thousand inhabitants at the
mercy Of three commissioners, vested
with full authority to say who shall
act as stewards and wards Of the peo-
pie.
Is this not a concentration OF power
fatal to the interests of the people?
With no voice to say who shall be
marshall. electrician, tax collector,
comptroller, city physician and chief
Of the water and fire departments,
street superintendent and SO on.
IN A LIMITED WAY.
1t is argued that the people will be
permitted to choose their commission
ers thereby maintaining their suffrage.
We grant this but in a limited sense.
But their suffrage extends no farther,
and ceases at the best viii and pleas
ure of the commissioners when once
elected. and we viii ask what security
will the people have that the commits
sioners will not appoint their friends,
| relatives and a host of fayorites to
carry our whatever plans that they de-
sire to coneoct, and in opposition to
| the will of the people.
II 1t were possible to. change the en-
| tire disposition of man; to strip him
| of the love of power; to correct his
! tendency to avarice; his idea of a false
lambition his selfishness and personal
| interest we would say let us make the
experiment and risk return to the
theory of government by the few and
not the many, but is he not so con-
| stftuted by nature that 1t IS neces-
| sary to place as many checks as pos
sible upon his conduct? Does not the
present aldermanic system of twelve
| offer stronger restrictions upon the
evils that may occur than when three
men may act in concert together? Is
| not division of power among twelve,
safer than a concentration of power
! in three? Is NSnot certain that three
are better able to keep their acts
guarded in secret than twelve?
1t is in politics as 1t is In religion,
| just as multiplicity of creeds, render
free thinker safe from persecution,
so does a multiplicity of parties, and
systems of checks, render a govern
nent safer from the evils of design
| ing few.
Reasoning from induction. IL three
men are chosen as the depositaries
| Of power, are better than twelve. then
| two are better than three, and one Is
| better than two, hence one should be
the rule.
NOT RESPONSIBLE.
It is claimed that evils have crept
into our present form. We doubt this,
and ask what has the present form to
do with the Irregularities that may
creep into it? Was there ever an in
stitution free from some imperfection
Absolute perfection is not a faculty of
/
| government of three, will take the same
| interest in the. present form that they
| propose to take in the commission
| form, it will prove to be the finest that
was ever conceived by man.
| 1t is a habit among our adversaries
te be constantly referring to other
cities as an example and a reason for
adopting their methods. What Have
we so far surrendered our individuality
as to play the part Of the monkey
or babboon by initiating them in their
| fclly or want OF wisdom.
Have we not spirit and manhood
enough left to act independently. main
| tain our free agency, and hold to the
| theory OF government that makes every
man sovereign? If the people OF
other cities are willing to part with
| their rights and sovereignty, Is that a
reason why we should 30 the same?
/ What are the evils which our OPP
ponents claim to exist in our present
administration, and which they are US
ing as a subterfuge to obtain control?
| We do not know of = single serious
1 ~haroe that ran he laid at IT'S door