The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1874-03-02


Al s.E*'E.
On Friday last, in executive session, the
Scnalo of the United States advised ant
consented to" the appointment Of William
4. simmons az collector of the port OF
Boston, Ivy a vote of tWcnty-scvcn in hi.
favor to seventeen in opposition twenty
seven Senators, or nearly one third of tn,
number being absent or ncglccting to vote
We regret This action more than words car
tell. We regret that the administration
should have made the mistake of nomina
ting such man-and the President can
didly admits that the nomination was .
mistake He further says that if he had
understood the situation" he should never
have made the nomination. and we think
herein, he made another grave mistake, ir
that being apprised of the feeling in Mas.
sachusetts, he did not. ut once withdraw
the nomination. and send in n new name
lie took that course in the cases of George
II Williams and Caleb Cushing, and the
whole country, without distinction of par.
y approved Of, and applaudcd, his action.
We regret the nomination and appointment
because il is contrary TO the rules of the
civil service ana directly counter to civil
service reform. Simmons has never been
connected with the customs department
and it is not known that he is familiar with
the laws, rules and regulations thereof. 1t
Is known that lie was supervisor of intern
al revenue for New England, and it is
charged, whether truthfully or not we are
unable to say, that instead of reporting
specific violations of that law, which came
under his observation, to the proper officers,
he reported thessame, to the now renowned.
Sanborne who, under his contracts, re-
cciyed one dollar for every other dollar
paid to the United States. If this is true.
he was not fit for the position. He was
appointed in direct opposition to the prn-
ciples OF civil service reform. The Prcsi-
dent is not supposed to know the character
habits and capabilities Of every man he
dominates for or appoints to, IN office.
He would be more than human if he did.
lie must take men on trust lie must rely
upon recommendations. The wonder is
that, with his presumed knowledge of Ben
jamln +. Butler, he should RELY upon his
recommendation He was compelled to
bottle him once, and he ought to have
staid bottled" Disguise it as we NAV,
Simmons NVos recommended fnr rnlInnto,
for political services rendered BENJAMIN Il.
Butler, because he was Il scrvile tool of
Butler, and because it was thought he
could ''do the most good" for Butler in the
next gubernatorial campaign as collector
than in any other position.
We regret the nomination. confirmation
and appointment more than all, for the
possible--aye probable-immcdiate injury
it will work on the republican party. The
individual or individuals, in this case, are
nothlng-thc cause everything The mere
abstract question whether William A. Sim
mons, on some other person, shall hold Il
particular Office is of no consequence to
any one, except those who desire the place.
ii The duties of the office are properly dis
charged. When, however, an appointment
symbolizcs obnoxious men, obnoxious pro-
cedures, obnoxious measures. and is
fraught with danger to the republican
party and the politics of the country, it is
OF vast consequence. "Butlcrisn' has be-
come a term in New England politics
which every one understands. 1t is ms
well understood rs was "Twecdism" in
New York and, now, throughout the
country, and "Camcrouism" in Pennsyl-
wanna. They all represent different phases
OF character and politics and are all to be
equally feared We do not believe that.
even with this success, the republican
party can be 'Butlcrizcd." We do not be.
lieye it can be put down. Unquestion-
ably but for the desire for this, on the part
Of the democrats, Simmons could never
haye been confirmed. Examine the vote.
lie received the votes Of only sixteen out of
the forty-nlnc republican senators, while
eleven of the nineteen democrats gave him
'hNh SNlppil WINS. MS ~ unDrc-
cedenied. Custom and courtesy has, here
toioIe, led the opposition to vote in COM
pliance with the wishes of the Senators of
the state in which the appointment was
made. Only two of Massachusetts eleven
Representatives favored the appointment,
eight opposed it by every honorable means
at their command, and both Senators
worked, spoke and voted against it. These,
be it remembered, were all good, honest,
earnest republicans, representative men of
Massachusetts, representatives of her NOR
ais, her worth, her intelligence, her char
acter, men of whom the republicans of
Massachusetts, and of the country are, as
they well may be, proud. Why, then, con-
trary to precedent and courtesy, do demo-
cratic Senators vote against their known