New Britain herald., 1928-05-12

of the places that is allotted to one Basically. his election or his ap- pointment is d political one. None but the most profound egotist would claim that the opposite political group reached into the party <with which he is affiliated and picked him out for service as a representa- tive, not of the republicans or the democrats, but as an example of q free-from-politics citizen.
 If an administration is a success, the credit does rot go to the + boards serving under the mayor or 10 the common council. but to the mayor himself. Likewise, if it is failure, he must take the onus. But once in the last quarter of a century has there heen a change of mayors when the political situation remain ed unchanged. This was in 1920 when o. F. Curtis, Q republican. succeeded George A. Quigley, also republican. The Curtis and Quigley camps were SO widely split that there was at least as much, If not more, divergence of opinionP and policy as if democrat had succeed ed a republican. Curtis could not be expected to allow Quigley to make his appointments, yet such would have been the case had he not givep the roster of officials a thorough overhauling. which he did. In this same manner, q republican could not be expected to hold the demo- cratic selections men who for two Or more years had been schooled in the democratic party's way of doing things and who owed a certain amount of allegiance to the Jeffer- sonian group. Following the same line of reasoning why should Mayor Paonessa be expected to allow the ship of state sail on with the same cref under a strange skipper? If cooperation among boards and the mayors office amounts to anything. and it is generally considered that it does there would seem to be jus tificatlon for changes. If none but the office of mayor were to be changed, would not the election be more or less formality" Wouldn't the boards be justified in ignoring the mayor and refusing to carry out his policies if they were not strictly in accord with those of the preced- ing administration Would not the democratic system of government q $ni j1Irn ,S,,- more appropriate? What would be the use of political parties when 3. permanent organization had been set up in the city government which would not be amenable to changes and new policies of rule?
 There are not few who agree that the system followed out in the federal government, where each president appoints his own cabinet members, Is not a total failure. Yet there is little difference in the gen. eral policy followed out by the may or's office.
 Individual cases. Of course. should be so considered. but it is very sel- dom a man is elected mayor who has not been a close student of city government and its officials. It is not unreasonable 10 suppose that he, perhaps in better measure than 99 44-100 per cent of the populace is in a position to say whether s certain official or employe has been or will be a drag on the government. His duty is to run the government. If he fails the stigma is on him. There arc few placed in that posi- tion who would not do considerable uprooting. Perhaps, in short, the in clinations of human nature explain political shake-ups: self preserva- ton. which the first law of nature. is the Justification.