The Portland daily press., 1877-08-08
[From the n. Y. Trib Ine.
Gail HamiltOn's Sixteenth Letter.
Exclusion of OMce-Holders from Politi-
cal Associations UDjust-The Order
Plainly Unlawful-singuiar Tests of
Fitness for Omce-Mr. Schurz's Price
for speeeh.Malking-Tru Civil Service
Reform,

SIR: President Hayes has lately taken one
very important step towards the enforcement
of what he regards as reform in the Civil Ser
vice. He forbids any officer of the Fedora
Government taking part III the management
of political organizations, caucuses, conven-
tions or election campaigns" He forbds any
assessment to be made for political purposes on
Federal ofice-holders, The penalty for exert
ing any political influence is. peremptory dis
missal from office.
This is not the first time that measures of
this sort have been attempted, but L believe
their success is yet in the future 1t is signif-
cant of the slight hold it has,taken upon the
American mind, that this order is to-day con-
sidered as novel, and as much an innovation as
if it had not been made nearly forty years ago
by Daniel Webster when he was Secretary of
State under President Harrison; an order
which lie enforced himself ten years later when
holding the same position under President Fill
more, by visiting with his severest displeasure
all Wings who refused to subscribe to the COM
promise measures of 1850. That is, Mr.. Web
ster aimed to secure the complete indepen-
-denee of the ofics-holders by making them
support policy against which their conscience
protested and their manhood rebelled Shall
history again repeat itself? cannot see that
the acceptance and adoption of this principle
would be creditable to the character or profit
able to the interests of the American people.
1t would be an undoubted .and unmitgated
evil and scandal that every man appointed to
Federal office should feel himself obligedto wear
the livery and do the political drudgery of the
Administration appointing him. No position
can be more humiliating than this, unless it be
the attitude of absoluts inaction and neutrality
which this order prescribes for the oftice-holder.
Why is it not just as offensive, degrading and
hum;litating to tell a man he holds Office on
condition that he abstain from politics, as that
he holds it on condition that he take an active
and noisy part in politics? Large business
firms are sometimes accused of attempting to
influence the political action of their employees,
but never heard such attempts pointed out
for emulation; it is always for shame. The
Democratic head of a mandatory who should
undertake to tell his men what meetings they
should or should not attend out of business
hours would be held up to Republican execra-
tion. do not see why the President has any
thing more to do with the manner in which
office-holders spend their time outside of busi-
ness hours than the head of any other business
firm. 1t is true that he, like the dry goods
merchant or the ordinary housekeeper, engages
the whole time of his servants; and in an emer-
gency, like them, he commands their whole
time. But it is also true that nature requires
and custom prescribes only certain routine of
duty within limited and set time, and outside
of that the man belongs to himself alone. The
President, like any other master, has the legal
power to dismiss man for any cause what
ever; but has he the moral right to dismiss him
for anything but neglect of his official duty?
especially for doing what every American citi-
zen has been taught to consider one of his first
patriotic duties? If politics are to be divorced
from the Civil Service, what has the President
to do with mans political work, provided he
does thoroughly the Civil Service he was hired
to do? For years it has been dinned into our
ears that every good citizen should attend pri-
maries and see to it that only good men are put
in nomination. Does the office-holder cease to
be a citizen? Has he no duties to perform in
the way of selecting good men and rejecting
bad men? Has he no interest in the integrity
and ability of any office but his own?
Indeed, the case is far stronger than have
put it. The President, unlike the head of a
down to the foot of the ladder, himself a serv-
ant. A man who absolutely owns factory
has the right to prescribe the terms on which
men NAV work in it; but the President has no
such right with officers OF the Federal Govern
ment. who are but his fellow servants. The
law. which is above President and department
clerks alike,-the law which is the voice Of the
people in organic, concrete FORM is alone able
to do this. L utterly deny that the President
has any right to prescribe or prohibit outside
the requirements of the law. He is to execute,
not to make the law, One of the grandest and
best of the old Revolutionary declarations in
New England was that the Colonists made
their resistance 'to the end that we may have
government of laws, and not government
of men," l maintain that the order of Pres-
dent Hayes is directly in the teeth of the letter.
and still more of the spirit of that declaration.
The President is indeed clothed by the Consti-
ton with the power of appointment, and, infer
entially, with the power of removal, but this
great power is to be exercised with discretion
as well as with conscientious fidelity; and
here, in this very power, lies the beginning, if
not the ending, of Civil Service Reform Give
US good appointments for all offices and Civil
Service reform is in fair way to become an ac-
complished fact But if this great power of
removal is to hang on any arbitrary thread
whatever, if it is be held over the heads of
offce-holders with the threat from the White
House that it shall fall on any one who exer-
cises right and performs duty common to
all American citizens, it seems to me an abuse
which puts the President into the position of
an absolute monarch, and clothes him with the
power of laying upon persons holding office
conditions not required by law, in conflict with
their rights as citizens, derogatory to their in
dependence as men.
When man enters office, he takes certain
prescribed oath as to his loyalty, bis obedience
to the Constitution and laws of the United
States, his solemn promise to perform his du-
ties well and faithfully, and if the Office in
wolves care OF public money and other prop
erty, bond is also given as additional security
to the government If the man be unfaithful
in any one OF these respects, it is the solemn
duty of the President, charged as he is with
the execution of the laws, to remove him.
But L say again, and apparently it cannot be
said too often, that the President has no more
right than Mr.. Hayes of Ohio to acd condi-
tion not required by law; no more right than
be has to abrogate one that is required by law.
If he believes that additional requirements
should be made, or additional prohibitions laid
upon oftice-holders, it his duty to recommend
law to that effect when he communicates with
Congress. If Congress be antagonistic or
apathetic the only thing that remains is to
labor with the people till they elect Congress
that is eager and active. But to make the law
of his own motion is, to my thinking, gross,
arrogant and dangerous assumption of power
which, however much it may be applauded by
the claquers of the press will in the end be
severely condemned by the sober judgment of
the people.
But the office holder gets such hold on the
machine that it cannot be loosed, and he rides
rough-shod over the peoples will, says the Re
former.
Let me assure the Reformer, who stands
huDgrily eyeing the machine, and whose ting
ers are restlessly working in his longing to
clutch it, that it would be more manly in him
TO go to work the manly way and get the ma
chine into his hands by superior strength than
to stand whining to the President to take the
other boys hands off! Take them off yourself
like man. We, the people, are not so effem-
mate that we should fear to be enslaved by
thrice the number of ofice-holders. Your
blessed bette noir, Gen. Butler, if you are to be
believed, rode US pretty hard in the Essex dis
trct, but when the people had once made up
their minds, out he went-office-holders and
all!
Is it ungenerous to think that the Reformefs
are seeking to get the machine into their own
hands rather than to destroy the machine?
Why they say it themselves. Is not Reform
er to be believed even when be speaks the
truth? They are so eager that all the motives
OF prudence cannot restrain them, but they are
continually popping up their heads to see what
progress is made and pushing little howls of
impatience because it creaks along so slowly.
Unfortunately" says one, "the Civil Service
Reform policy announced by the Administra-
tiOn has as yet borne no fruits in pennsylvania.
Cameron's satellites are still in office all over
the state, and there is therefore no encourage
ment for the real Reform element in the party
to come forward and push the machine men
out of the control of the organization. The
Cameron men mean to let the election go by
default" Wait a moment. How is this?
Why do you wish to push the machine men
out of the control? You admit that they will
let the, election 60 by default That is, they
will take their hands off the machine and let it
spin around till it runs down. That is, they