Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1872-01-03
THE CONSISTENCY OF THE PRESIDENT
OPPONENTS.

When the New York Times, some
months ago, called Oakley Hall, Boss
Tweed, and other leaders of Tammany
Hall "thieves," instead of disproving the
charge, they met it by impugning the mo-
tives of the publishers. The public there
fore adiudged them guilty. When the OPP
ponents of the President charge him with
corruption, they are answered by facts.
When they accuse him of bad taste in
appointing his relatives to office, the Of
fence alleged is one against prOpriety and
not against Jaw. This being the case it is
fair enough to judge the accused by the
standard of his accuSers.
The leading opponents of the Presi
dent in the Republican party are Senators
TrumbulI and Schurz. They are Jealous
for reforms in the civil service. Is this
q newborn zeal cunningly espoused to raj
ly the opposition against the President, or
has it been principle long controlling
their public acts? Let us see. how the facts
are.
At the first meeting of President Grants
Cabinet after his Inauguration, he an
nOunced to the heads of the depart
ments his purpose to retain lin office
such of JOhnsOn's appOintees as
were friendly to the Government du-
ring the war, whose records as. public Off
GERS showed them to he competent and
honest. One of the first instances in which
the President was impOrtuned to depart
from this first effort towards reforming the
civil service, was in the case of the pension
agency at Springfield, Illinois. The in
cumbent, at the time referred to, was an
eN-soldier and competent officer. But
Senator Trumbull had brother-in-law, a
civilian, with no earthly claims tothe
place, whom he desired should have the
office. Governor Cox, then Secretary of
the Interior, refused to make the change,
upon the request of Senator Yates, the col
league of Senator Trumbull. The entire
illinois delegation then joined in request
ing removal, General Logan, now OPP
posed to the President, among the number.
Secretary Cox still refused, when the Pres
ly for the friends of civil service reform,
the President and his Cabinet are not en-
tirely free to act as they choose in such
cases rs the one referred to. They are
compelled, under the distribution Of pow
ers made by the Constitution, to go to
Congress frequently for legislation to facil-
itate their Executive duties, and for apprO-
priations to carry on theGoyernment. They
are not independent of Congress any more
than Congress is independent of other CO.
ordinate branches of the Government.
johnson tried to be the Government and
failed as we all know. So in the case of
the pension agent at Springfield, the
President, i'll obedience to the importuni-
ties of the Senators and Representatives
from Illinois, and from a natural desire to
maintain friendly relations with the con-
gressional delegation from his own State,
was persuaded to yield, and Senator Trum-
BULBS brother-in-law was appointed.
This case was one of the very first of the
kind upon which the President was called
to act. Senator Trumbull,s success en-
couraged others to try and the pressure for
changes grew so great that many more
were uIdue ClldH was cNeI CoHIeIupldleu.
Senator TIumbull having led in this war
on the Presidents earliest efforts to re-
form the civil service, the question natu-
rally suggests itself: ought he now to
lead in an opposition that assumes extra
zeal for this very reform as its chief claim
to popular favor? Having Emporium
ed the President to suspend these eff
forts at reform in order to secure an
office for his own brother-in-law, we are
constrained to ask, ought he be foremost
and super-zealOus in opposing the Presi-
dent because of his alleged nepotism?