The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1915-03-17
oCopyrigh t)
WISHES OF PATRONS
IGNORED SAYS r. S.
Reckoning Coming in Due Time, He
Asserts-Proceeding in Postofice
Controversy Criticized.
Editor OF The Reformer

Editor OF The Reformer:
What have state committees. legi-la-
tors, unsuccessful candidates for state
office to do with the Brattleboro post
Office? The true answer is. they have no
more moral right to influence such an ap-
pomtment than they have to select a town
clerk, board OF seectmen, or official
boards Of local churches. The postoffice
belongs to the folks at home and has not
home rule been the popular contention of
Parnel and Redmond and their millions
OF supporters since the foundation Of free
governments Does not the postotfice be
long to its patrons: and have they surren-
dered their right to say who shall serve
them. You say, locally Mr. Moran did
not strive for the greatest possible num-
Der OF slgners to his petition No. he
sought endorsements in northern Yer
mont, and when soliciting for endorse
ments near the border why did he not
20 into Canada for signatures which
would have had equal relevancy to the
Brattleboro postofiice! Is it not true that
four OF the largest patrons of the Brattle-
boro Office endorsed Mr. Childs and wrote
the strongest possible letters endorsing
his candidacy, while his petition bore the
signatures of more than l 200 local
and the towns substantial citizenship
probably five times the number recorded
on any other petitionz Should endorse
ments from beaten nonresident candidates
| in northern Vermont effect the conduct
OF a local postoffice and who other than
| the patrons OF such office should have the
| slightest interest III 1t further than polit-
| zeal schemingr You say, this committee
at first, eight to three, and later. unani-
mously, endorsed Mr.. Moran" Do you
not understand that the state Democratic
committee Is composed of II members and
| there could have been no unanimous vote
in the II members quoted by YOU? Chair
man Kennedy had written the several
candidates promising square deal and
asked all the committeeman to withdraw
| any pledges they had given.
/ Is it not true that Chairman Kennedy
and his candidate absolutely declined to
accept a suggestion from the department
/ to submit this question for settlement to
! the patrons OF the office-the only people
interested? You and every patron Of the
| BrattIeboro office know why. The test OF
ones popularity for an office Is generally
shown through his endorsements of his
townspeople whom he is to serve Mr.
| Childs's petition was not sent to Wash
ington until. after a majority of the Demo
cratic town committee Of Brattleboro had
asked, by resolution, that the petitions
OF all the candidates be reviewed by the
department upon their merits, which LED
to the appointment of Mr.. Childs fo1
postmaster.
1t is we'll Mr. Editor, to keep the plain
facts before you that no injustice may bt
done anyone, because ex parte information
is not always reliable. When you say
the usually reliable Springfield Republi
can has evidently been misinformed' il
its statement that Mr.. Childs was en-
dorsed, three to one, for the Brattleborc
office, and that the result is of a piece
with other happenings engineered by tn,
head of the postoffice department,
would refer YOU to the case of Rutland
where an overwhelming majority of tn,
Democrats and patrons Of the office hal
endorsed William 5. Smith, an honorable
and popular citizen and reputable mer
chant of that city, for the Rutland office