Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1872-11-27


of the appointment of the Philadelphia
postmaster, under the civil service rules, has
excited considerable ire among th politir
clans Of the Republican party who worked
hard for Grants reelection. Even Fred.
Douglass comes out in bis paper critieising
the President. The latter deems the attack
worthy of notice and in double loaded
editorial which was dictated for his organ
at the Executive Mansion, thus represents
himself:
The President has lately given the entire
question of civil service good deal Of at
tention and consideration, and is, we un-
derstand, entirely satisfied that the compe-
titive system should not be rlgidly enforced,
il, indeed, he is not convinced that it should
be entirely abolished. What is required is
standard of efficiency to which all who
are candidates should be up. When that is
attained then the secondary considerations
will be considered. It is not the intention
to put the enemies of the Republican party
on an equal footing with Woodworking
Republicans, but It is the intention that" hard
working Republicans" shall not obtain Office
without the least regard to their compe-
tency. Gen. Grant believes that frst.of all,
all other things being equal, the men who
have stood BY the party should be appointed
to Office in preference to those who have
been opposed to it.
This looks as though the President had de-
termiped to back down little from the po-
sition which he took in the Philadelphia case.
Then, upon the other hand, we have the
New York Times, the leading Radical or
gan of the country, in lis issue of the 2Sd
calling upon Congress to back the President
in bis first position. 1t calls upon public
opinion to sustain him. OF course it means
the 'public opinion" of his own partisans,
as the public opinion of bis opponents has
been very freely and emphatically expressed.
Speaking of the nomination Of Fairman,
the deputy, to be postmaster Of Philadel-
phia in lieu of Bingham who resigned, the
Times calls attention TO the fact the Senate
has yet to confirm the nomination Of MIR.
Fairman. 1t has long been the custom
of the Senate to refer all appointments
to the Senators from the States in which are
the offices to be filed. If Cameron should
be willing to carry his opposition to the
Senate, the issue would be doubtful unless
the Senators should make up their minds
that their constituencies thoroughly approve
the course of the President, and desire its
continuance, and thereupon determine to
stand by the people at some risk to them
selves as Office seekers. The difficulty
which may thus arise in the case of Mr..
Fairman, may arise in regard to an appoint
ment to any vacancy in offices filed by the
consent of the Senate, and included in the
civil service rules. Ofthese offices, there
are some three thousand, and the applica-
ton of real reform to them depends finally
on the Senate.
But there is some responsibility also upon
the House of Representatives. The machine
~ for the enforcement Of the civil service
rules requires number Of local examining
boards, proportioned TO the extent to which
the rules are applied. These ought to have
some members chosen from outside the
present service. To secure this requires
further action by Congress. 1t is at least
gratifying to see that while the President
is trying to back out from the advanced po-
stion he took in the Philadelphia case, the
New York Times, his laading organ, is call
ing upon the Senate and House of Repre-
sentatives and upon public opinion to help
him to stand fast. The Times concludes its
appeal thus:
tits difficQlt TO believe that Congress will
fail to see, not only the plain duty, bat the
equally plain interest Involved in cordially
supporting the President ia this reform.
We GO not expect Unanimity, but we do
expect hearty and practical acceptance of
the Presidents measures. The responsible
ity now rests clearly on Congress, and first
and most directly on the Senate. In that
body are many members who, during the
recent canvass, upheld with great vigor the
claims Of the Republican party to be trust
ed as Reform party. They were sustained
in doing so by the Philadelphia platform, by
the policy of the President, and by the uni
form sentiment Of the best portion of the
party. Il is not just to these gentlemen to
suppose that they are prepared TO falsify by
their own actions the claims they made on
the confidence of the people. If they are
made to know distinctly that the people
would look on any such course on their part
as gross breach of trust, as well as piece
Of great folly, there need be no question as
to Che result.