New-York tribune., 1872-06-22
tcovcrRYTNG BROTHERS-IN-LAW.

II is barely possible that when the FIJI
savan stands on the broken arches of the now
unbuilt East River bridge to sketch the
ancient ruins of New-York, this fragment OF
the history of the present. Administration will
be left on record; at tendcrly cared for its
brothers-iS-iaw.n There does not seem
much hope for tho immortal survival
of any other great trait OF the
existing domination. Its last year is lapsing,
and its oratorical champions are greatly put
about TO End anything really notable to say OF
it 80, in default of other good, they fall on
things which tho country and the Republican
party have done and credit them to the head
and heart of the Chief Magistrate. If the Pres
ent is so pressed for causes for congratulation,
what can History do Let us take heart of grace
that it may say of Gen. Grants bret reign
that brOthers-in-law did exceedingly flourish
therein. Disasters attended our bombshell
diplomacy If the Corea; we were scofed at
from Copenhagen TO Peking; offices were
given away as holiday presents to unworthy
men the resources of the country were used
to enrich personal favOrites, but the Admins
tration's brothers-in-law were the wards Qt
the nation.
Why not all brOthers-in-la Why make fish
Of one sort and flesh of anOtherf A New
York organ of the Administration holds up
the scalp of late clerk in the General Land
Office, and exults in the fact that its late
wearer was brother-in-law of Senator Tip
ton. Now, Mr.. Upton does not "stand by the
Administration" therefore his brother-in-law,
though probably fair enough man as
brotbers-in-law run, is marked for sudden
and swift destruction. The organ gives as
reason for his ordained ruin that he is Sena-
tor Tiptons brother-in-law. He may have
been good clerk and unobjectionable quite,
as O party man; but, as brother-ln-law OK
Senator Upton, his ofense was mOrtally
rank. THE TRIBUNE, as is tolerably well
known, does not believe in the Presidents
appointing relatives to office; the practice is
bad in morals and precedent. But is an Ad-
ministration which appears to subslst for the
benefit of brOthers-ln-law to cast the first
stone at these unfortunate relativesf Ii the
Door clerk in the Generall Land-Ofice is to be
banned because he happens to be brother-in-
law of somebody, whatever is to become OF
the Minister to Copenhagen, the Chief APP
praiser at San Francisco, the Collector OF
customs aI NeW-OrleahS' uho ""iU0 ~
Doorkeeper, and all the vast swarm of brothers
in-law which has settled down upon the land
To be "a brother-in-law of the Administra-
ton, or TO establish never so remote
claim of consanguinity with one Of these happy
mortals, is to embark upon food that leads
on to fortune. To be brother-in-law of one
who is not for the Renominated is crime
with the Administration. Seriously, let us
have clean sweep of brothers-in-law. Do MT
let us stay our hands with the ex-clerk of the
Land-Office, but keep on until they are all
gone-from Copenhagen to New Orleans. 1t
will never do to dismiss one family and hold
fest to another. To drive out the Tiptons
and keep the Cramers, Dents, and Caseys is
not honest; it is only sham Civil Reform, OF
which we have had something too much.