The New York herald., 1874-11-16
President Grants Cabinet.

Besides his duty to redeem the pledge he
volunteered to make on accepting his first
nomination there are other reasons why the
people by reconstructing his administration.
II is mistake to suppose that the Executive
has no responsibility for the legislation of the
government, and General Grant cannot shield
himself against public censure by trying to
shift the blame upon Congress. Congress IS
not primarily responsible either for Boutwels
financial policy or Williams Southern policy,
the fruits of which are the two chief sources
Of public discomfort The course pursued by
| Boutwell, with the sanction of the Cabinet,
and the course pursued by Williams, with the
sanction of the Cabinet, are the two main
features of the domestic policy of Grants
administration, policy which Congress did
not originate, but only acquiesced IN. The
President is as free to change his advisers
when q public verdict has been pronounced
against them as the Queen Of England is to
change hers. They hold their offices at his
pleasure, and there is no other way by which
he can execute the will of the people," as
expressed in the elections, than by changing
his counsellors as the Queen does hers in like
circumstances
1t is true that the Ministry hold somewhat
different relation to Parliament from that of
the Cabinet to Congress. But there are also
points of resemblance. In both countries the
law-making power is vested in the two houses
and yet in both countries the Executive De-
partment is held practically responsible for
most Of the great measures of legislation.
This may be made clear by examples The
first Reform bill was Russslls. the Bank
Charter act was Peel's, the second Reform bill
was Disraeli's, the Irish Church and Irish
Land bills were Gladstones, although the
technical responsibility rested with the Par
liaments that passed them. 1t is true that
Congress acts with greater independence of
the Cabinet than Parliament does of the Min
istry, and yet most Of the really great meas
ures in our Legislative history are justly
attributed to particular members of the Execu-
tive Department, either the President him.
self or some head of q department.
government, for example-although they, of
course, took the form of acts Of Congress
have always been credited to Hamilton.
When Webster had occasion to allude to these
measures he seemed to overlook Congress en-
tirely, ascribing them to the genius of Hamil-
ton in this splendid burst of eloquence: :-'He
smote the rock Of the national resources and
abundant streams of revenue gushed forth.
He touched the dead corpse of the public
credit and it sprang upon its feet The fabled
birth of Minerva from the brain of Jove was
hardly more sudden or more perfect than the
financial system Of the United States as it
burst forth from the conceptions of Alexander
Hamilton" And yet the four great measures
which made up Hamilton's financial system
were only SO many acts of Congress, of which
he was not member. We have witnessed
similar instance in our own time. Our present
system of national banks is unquestionably
the creation of Secretary Chase. The Ma
tlonal Banking act is indeed an act of Con-
| gress and derives all its authority from its
passage by that body; but it nevertheless
owes it's existence to Mr.. Chase, and history
will always regard him as its author. Such
examples are too numerous for us to give list
Of them. The Embargo act was Jeferson's,
the Sub Treasury act was Van Buren, S, the
annexation of Texas, though by joint resolu-
ton, was Calhouns (then Tyler's Secretary of
State), the Tariff act of 1846 was Robert j.
Walkers. Indeed, it is so customary to
ascribe important acts of Congress to the
Executive that it is often held responsible for
acts which neither the President nor any head
! of department ever recommended, and the
President merely signed. Thus John Adams
popularity was destroyed by the Alien and
Sedition laws and Fillmore's by the Fugitive
Slave act
And there is great deal of justice in hold
ing the Executive responsible for legislation
when he has majority of his own party in
both houses Of Congress. In making up his
Cabinet the President has his choice among
the ablest statesmen of his party. Men OF
commanding influence do not so abound in
any party that President may not easily
compose Cabinet whose joint abilities will
outweigh all the political talent in Congress.
A Cabinet thus composed OF the great lights
Of the party need seldom have any difficulty
in controlling the action of their own party
Their most powerful engine for exerting such
influence is their ascendancy over public
opinion, by which they can bring strong
pressure to bear on members from their con-
stituents. In the next place, Q Cabinet of
great ability is more likely than Congress
to reach sound and sagacious views,
and the force of truth and reason
is apt to make an impression. In
the third place, the Executive has patron
age for which the constituents of members are
applicants, which is q great resource in the
hands of q vigorous, united Cabinet which