New-York tribune., 1877-08-18
rhe newspapers have just informed MS that Lord
Beaconsfnld has annointed To the nnsitinn of Com

ment contrayenes the requirements of the Select
| Committee that the incumbent should have
technical acquaintance with the duty Of the Office
rs Mr.. Pigott was not acquainted with its duties,
and that the Rouse Of Commons passed whlh~~hS
virtually a vote of censure him TO the effect
g that the recent appointment is calculated TO
diminish the influence and usefulness Of the Select
Committees of the House. and discourage the zeal
OF the officers of the public Departmental The Lon
don Times says: "Ihc results Of last nights vote
cannot be serious. The Ministry will have received
gentle admontion to DO little more careful in
their appointments. Lord Beaconsfeld will read in
the vote warning that the spirit Of the age must
not be disregarded in the dispcnsation of patron
age"
| And the American Reformer, with his usual aGl-
ty in extracting sunshine from cucumbers, holds
this up as a proof of the truth Of his view Of the
English Civil Service. viz: that il has such thing
patronage but that place there is acquired solely
by competitive examination. He might just as in
telligenty brandish poor old Fi.zhugh proof Of
the favless purity of our Civil Service. Every
point of this little item OF news indicates that Eng
lish human nature moves in precisely the same pot-
ical grooves with American human nature and is
balanced and held in check by precisely
the same motives, in precisely the same
manner. Prof Fiske sits down sercncy
in the classic shades of Cornell, and writes: "Thc
results Of the Reform in England are, FIRST, the pat
ronage formerly enjoyed by Members OF Parliament
has been entirely done away with, and Government
employG3 are outside Of partisaniniuence " and
no doubt speaks the truth according to his lights;
but the House, according to The London Tins. gives
the Premier a smart little loye-pat and says; DIZZY
my boy. be little more careful how you distribute
your patronage, which is very good advice both 10
English and American Cabinets. But viii Prof.
Ia t,li IL rop I'm Fuulguf
what has Lord Beaconscld to be careful about, and
what has he been censured for and where is the
competitive examination that did not discover Mr..
Pgotts ignorancel
Lord BcacOnslield afterwards exculpated himself,
but the whole explanation shows how closely The
two governments resemble each other Mr. Grey
formerly held that place-a man Of literary promi-
nence under whom extravaganza went on without
check"l The Select Committee advised that tho
place be filled by some one who had practical
knowledge of stationery, and Lord Beaconsleid
TUNED upon his heel and put in man who knew
nothing about stationery who had been junior clerk
in the War Office, and had 10 be jumped over the
heads of slxty-eight clerks in his department.
And Lord Beaconsfeld denies that there was any
application from the candidate or any interference
Of friends precisely Mr.. Eyarts might and exactly
as if those things were not long rendered impos-
s'be by Reform and be rdcules the Select Commit
tee TO their faces aud in fair way 20 make
the whole House of Commons sit down To Iepast
Of its words.
We are referred 10 Mr.. Mundella who said to a
New-York audience, :" stand before you. the rep.
resentatye OF the largest constituency in England,
and ] have not the power to control the appoint
mcnt Of the lowest excise officer"
Nv acauaintance with Mr. Muudclla is Of the
slightest but my impression that he was steadily
~. I. IL. 4 .sr,f,
as properly matter of boast as If Mr. Fernando
Wood should have pinned himself beforean Eng
lish audience at any time during the last six
teen years on his inability TO control an appoint-
mcnt Bat more than that. there is moi Senator or
a member of the House in the United states who
must not also unite in the same confession. No
Congressman any than Mr. Aiundclla has power.
to control the app infment of the lowest excise
officer He may Use his influence, and SO may Mr..
Mundella but the control is not IN his bands. Tho
two syslems are absolulcly alike in this respect.
thnI that no accusation makes any political
patronage SO bad. 50 immoral. 80 mcXcBsahle and
indefensble, the sale of ecclesiastical patronage
in ENGLAND In the late discussion upon il in Par
Lament il was defended upon 10 grounds but of
practical expectancy. II was denounced rs almost
Infamous as a shameful breach of sacred trusi as
dlscred able rs the sale of a for the election Of
| p member Of Parliament.
The British Foreign Office is now Nursing seam
dal as great as any that ever disgraced our annals
and its longtime custom OF forcing us Consus and
aaenfs 10 depend upon go-betwsens for advance
meut or even leave Of absence j. system admirably
calculated 10 breed scandal--aud not q whit nearer
ideal purity than cur own foreign service We viii
not rejoice in our neiglbor's sins; but little s-r-
tiny OF tlis sort might relieve Mr. Carl SchurZ from
the embarrassment of excessive blushing for tnc Pc
culiar enormity of our national trans nsgressions.
II ,eeins TO me that some Of our RefOgmcgs have a
childish feeling that England has had Civil Service
Reform and so we mnst have one But what vas
England reformed front Until 1910, Gogernment
enploy6s IN England were simply private clerks 10
ihe Minister. Their pay came ont OF his fees, a9d
his foes were from anybody who had business with
his department. Tie sale Of places in ms depart
nent was also a recognized source of revenue to the
Minister who bad 10 salary, but lived literally
Oh public pluuder Mr Pitts example brought
this practice into il-cdor. ard by lSlo
the Fee fund had so fallen of that taere
was not enough to pay the clerks. and they
were remanded by law 10 the Civil List Of the Sow
ereign. and afterwards to the Parliamentary fuad
appropriated for the purpose. This Wa indeed
reiorm removing the clerks from beng me servants
of man, first 20 being servants of the King and
chen Of the nation. Bu, such state of things ever
existed in this country. OUr officers have been ito
! servants Of the nation from tie beginning,
paid by salaries and not by fees. Nith great sum-
England obtained freedom. bur we were !itt-borii.
| The "patronager of the English Ministry was sone-
/ thing which happily we know .ftic ahont. We 'e-
nounce patronage glbly aS # il grew Oh every bush;
! but the one example OF Od-i,shomcd Ensliah 'Pai-
ronage came 10 tie surface Winter before iaa and
set the whole country tHg.iug with shame @Hi