, 1876-04-22
Party Responsibility.

J
of the ablest republican papers pub
lished on this coast, scouts the idea
that the republican party is not to be
held responsible for the acts of its
! Williams, its Babcock, It's Belknap,
its Delano, and its thousand-and.one
other public pIunderers, 1t holds the
republican party responsible for the
acts of the knaves in Office, and says
that reflection demonstrates that there
are but two tests by which political
organization can be Judged, and that
these ere, fret the character of the
measures it advocates, and second, the
character of the men it puts in office.
General Belknap was appointed by
President Grant, who is himself at
this moment fully and openly sustain.
ed and indorsed by the republican
managers almost everywhere. Gen
eral Belkhap was the natural and
legitimate outcome Of that system of
civil service which President Grant
mas maintained, and which unques-
tionably owes its present condition
mainly to bis rejection of all schemes
of publication aud reform. The cor
ruption which prevails in the public
service is emphatically the product of
what may be called Grantism, but
this corruption has never been reeog
nizcd by republican managers as an
evil demanding redress, but on the
contrary, they nave repeatedly, as in
the case of the three State conventions,
gone out of their way to eulogize the
President, and have, in the face of the
most damaging evidence, declared
him entitled to the gratitude and es-
TEEN of the country for his public ser>
vices as a statesman.
Now when the managers of a great
political organization thus put them
selves on the record as indorsing and
sustaining the man whose choice of
counselors and officers has resulted so
disastrously, it requires casuist of
more than ordinary acuteness to dis
cover how they can evade direct re-
sponsibility in the premises. What
would be thought of a bank manager
who should select his subordinates
from the penitentiary, and, when they
had cracked the safe in accordance
with their professional instincts, should
turn round and gravely observe that
it would be cruelty wrong TO hold him
responsible /; that this was clearly a
case where the innate depravity of the
burglars was alone accountable and
that his own course had been conspic.
uously wise and upright ? And what
would be thought ii, after such an
event, the directors of the bank were
to meet in the parlor and pass resOIu-
tions eulogizlng and indorsing the
manager and assuring the public
that he was in no way responsible for
what had happened, and that the full.
est confidence ought to be reposed in
the conduct of the bank?
Perhaps such 4 case is hardly con-
ceiyable, and yet it is plain enough
that something very like this is what
has actually happened to the republi
can party. But period has been reach.
ed where the body of the party refuses
to 60 along with the managers in
this work of apology for corruption.
The people preceive that the need OF
reform is imperative; the corruption
IN office has become too frequent and
fragrant TO be condoned; that respon
sibiIity does rest upon the leaders of
the party, and that since they are
themselves too demoralized to lift j
finger in the direction of reform, it is
necessary TO choose between throwing
them overheard or breaking up The
organization. Assuredly no services
that any party ever rendered cOun.
try could make it worth the coun>
try's while to retain it in power if that
could only be done by ignoring or in
dorsing corrupt practices, and coun-
tenancing fraud and scondrelism in
the public service. Aud if this is
true, it is not less true that there
is rank incivism, and almost trea.
son to the republic, in the audaei-
Gus attempts which have latterly
been made to shuttle off the repub.
liean party's responsibility for Belk-
nap, and to make il appear that those
who SOW the seed are not accountable
for the character of the crop.