The New York herald., 1875-08-25

|
to obey orders unquestioningly and unhesi-
tatingly. That is the imperative necessity of
military life. Tennyson, in the "Charge of
the Light Brigade" tersely explained this
matter
Theirs not to reason why;
Theirs not 10 make reply;
Theirs but 10 do or die,
he says, and sums up the whole duty of all,
even the highest subordinate military officers.
But in civil government matters are
arranged very differently. Not only may
civil officer even of low grade, rightly refuse
to obey what he believes to be an unlawful
command from his superior; not only may
he both ''reply" and treason why" but in
all free and what are called responsible
governments the highest subordinate exec
utive officers are held to share in the respon-
sibility of the chief executive The cabinet
minister is the official adviser of his chief
1t is supposed that the chief executive lays
before his cabinet the policy he thinks wise
and proper; it is supposed that he consults
this body, and that on all important ques-
tions he has their consent before he acts
If any member of cabinet disapproves of
the policy determined on by his chief, and
that policy is of real importance, it is sup
posed that the cabinet officer will resign,
and this for the sufficient reason that if he
retained his place the public, the country,
would, with justice, believe that he approved,
and hold him, in common with his chief,
responsible for the course pursued.
! All this is very well understood and is
| o4l,a
impossible to obtain statesmen to serve in
cabinet Offices The place, which is one of
| first rate importance in free government,
would ON any other condition be degraded to
that of a mere clerk or a staff officer. No one
can imagine Clay, Webster or Calhoun, JEFF
ferson, Hamilton or Madison, Chase or
Douglas remaining in the Cabinet when they
disapproved of vital question of admins
tration or policy. They would rightly have
thought themselves degraded. In minor de-
tails they might and did ''agree to Disagree
but when it came to really important and
public question they preferred independence
to a position only to be held at the sacrifice
of principle or character. Nor is this merely
matter of etiquette. 1t has important uses
and consequences. 1t increases the sense of
responsibility of the chief executive, be-
cause, however careless President might be
of general public opinion, which cannot
make itself felt, except at elections and
then often only indirectly, he would be care
full not to direct all eyes upon his blunder or
misconduct by carrying it to such an extreme
as to provoke the resignation of cabinet
officer-a public protest by one who ought,
in his position, to be a statesman of promi-
nence and character.
OF course, no one can determine the pre-
else cause for which a cabinet officer differ
ing with his chief ought to resign. That is
question addressed to the conscience, the
sense of honor or the opinions of each men,
Der of the cabinet at the time. But one
thing is certain-that, retaining his place,
he commits himself to the policy. For in
stance, when, last winter the New Orleans
affair aroused public attention, it was
given out that at least two members of the
Cabinet-Messrs Fish and Jewell-were
strongly opposed TO the course which the
President favored and ordered in Louisiana.
But as their opposition was not publicly de-
monstrated, as they retained their places,
the public justly took for granted that they
were not in fact opposed, but that they were
in harmony with the President. Again,
when the President was known to favor and
urge the adoption of the Habeas Corpus and
Force bill, this did not dissolve the Cabinet;
and it is to be supposed, therefore, that all
its members favored this extreme policy.
Again, when the President sent in his star
Ting Arkansas Message the Cabinet were
silent, and the people understood, very
properly, that they approved even this re-
markable policy.
! The result has been that the American peo-
pie, who undoubtedly condemn all these
measures which events have shown to be
needless and very dangerous, condemn also
the Cabinet in common with the President,
as the authors and supporters of these meas
ures. So completely has President Grant
succeeded in forcing his whole Cabinet to
support HIM in all parts of his policy, so en-
tirely has he committed them to his own
views, that they figure in the public esteem
to-day as little more than his chief clerks.
The ablest of them has lost character and
prestige by his submission to policy many
parts of which he must have disapproved;
and we see the remarkable spectacle of
Cabinet no one of whose members is regarded
as a possible successor of the President, be-
cause all are committed to his views.
! But just now question arises different in
kind from those which heretofore have made
it difficult for some members of General
Grants Cabinet to retain at the same time
their places and their consistency. In the
Louisiana and the Arkansas measures and in
the matter of the Force bill the question was
one of Judgment. In the case Of Mr. Delano
and the conduct of Indian affairs the ques-