In another column will be founc a communication on the coming city election from a well-known democrat. He brings out clearly the fact that there has not been the increase in city expenses which has been urged as an excuse for the citizen's movement. In fact, during the past three years of democratie administration, the average expense per year has been nearly $1,000 less than under the last year of republican adminijtration and that in spite of the fact which everybody admits, that great and permanent improvements have been made in the city. It may be asked, where, then, does the increase in taxes come in ? In the first place, the board of supervisors have largely incréased the equalization of the city and correspondingly decreased the equalization of the rest of the county, so that the city pays a larger share of the state and county taxes than it did. In the second place, the liquor tax, which formerly all went to the city, has been divided and half of it now goes to the county, thus increasing the amount of city expenses which has to be raised by general taxation. In the third place the school tax has been incréased from $19; 7 in J887 to $29,000 the past year. In the fourth place, when the democratie admiuistration came in power, they found many funds overdrawn and they now have $11,000 in the treasury. There would seem to a candid observer nothing in these figures to cast reflection upon the democratie government of the city. And figures are stubborn arguments. A government which has made the many improvements of the past few years and which has kept pace with the rapid growth of the city, without increasing the city expenses must necessarilyhave been an economical one. Why then should any democrat unite with a movement to condemn it ? It is said that many of our best business men don't hold city offices. This is simply because they refuse to take them. Every year pressure is brought to bear upon our best citizens to induce them to accept of office. Every year in both democratie and republican caucusses an honest effort is made to induce the best men in both parties to take nominations. This is shown by the number of declinations of office on the eve of the caucusses by men in both parties. A city office is a thankless place to fill. It is only too common to throw stones at the council men, or other city officers who are giving their time to the city without compensation, and honestly endeavoring to serve the city to the best of their ability. If this stone throwing ceased and praise was given where deserved, it would be much easier to get good business men to accept the nominations. Every business man owes it to tñe city, at least once in his life to answer the cali of his fellow citizens to accept of office and serve his time for the good of the city. The trouble is and has been that too many neglect to recognize this obligation. It has been urged that men dislike to go into caucuses and seek nominations. However true this may be in county nominations, it is not necessary in city caucuses and conventions. The nominees have usually needed to be urged to stand. In very many cases nominations have been refused those who sought them and given to ■ those who have expressed themselves decidedly against accepting them. As a rule, a city office seeks a man, not the man the office. Our objection to the so-called citizens' movement is that it is nota representative movement. The names of those who are asked to select a ticket have been picked out by, if not one man, at least a small coterie. The average citizen has had no chance in their selection. In a caucus every man has a chance to be heard, and it is the duty of every man who owes allegiance to any party to attend them. The names given in the so-called citizens' list are those of very reputable business men,but we understand that many of them were used without the consent of theowners of :he names, and are of men who disapprove the movement and will have nothing to do with it. Among those who have told the Argus that their names were used without theirconsent are Dr. John Kapp, Christian Martin, Edward Duffy and Robert Shannon. We have been told of a ïumber of others who were not consulted. We believe that the democrats will put a ticket of strong men in he field this spring, men who will rove an honor to the offices. It is heir duty to do so, and we urge every good democrat to turn out to he caucuses and see that it is done.