Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1877-11-28
The OpposltiOn Narrowing.

II is quite noticeable that the opposition
to the prominent features of President
Hayes policy on the part of certain radical
politicians and journals is gradually lessen
ing, and spirit of tacit acquiescence, II
not positive approval, is taking its place.
Especially is this demonstrated in the recent
caucuses of the Republican Senators, and
in their interview with the President. No
complaint whatever was made of the action
of the executive in removing the troops from
the Louisiana and South Carolina state
houses No one even intimated that it was
a mistake. That action is now accepted in
all quarters as an accomplished fact, and the
disposition to criticize it in the name of the
"stalwart Republcanism of the North has
entirely passed away. If there were no
other questions now at issue between the adj
mnistration and the party organization ex-
cept those of which Governors Packard aud
Chamberlain are the representatives, the
harmony would be complete.
Nor is the civil service order any longer
bone of serious contention, when properly
understood That order does not interfere
with the right of any oiIice.holder to vote or
to make speeches and write editorials or
letters in behalf of the candidates whose
election he desires. 1t simply says that he
shall not put his hand on the crank of the
political machine, using the influence or
patronage of his position to crowd others
off, and run it in his own personal interest
or the personal interest of some favorite of
his in the party. This may not be just what
the order says, but it is what il means, and
there is not Republican Senator so much
prejudiced against the administration or so
blinded by party zeal that he does not know
that the purpose and spirit of the order meet
with almost universal approval among the
people.
What, then, remains to prevent perfect
harmony between the President and the
Senators :? We are ashamed to say it, but
every observing man at Washington knows
that it is simply question of who shall
control the appointments. If the President
had made it practice, as his predecessors
have done, to invite the Republican SEN
ators and Representatives from the several
states to name the man whom they would
like to have appointed to ofiice-simply be.
coming their clerk TO register their WILL in
stead of exercising his constitutional right
himself-there would be no complaint from
the politicians. To be sure, the Senators
did not go to the White House and demand
the control of the patronage, but we believe
it not uncharitable to assume that this was
the real grief involved in the sole complaint
to which they did give utterance, viz: that
the President was giving Offices to Southern
democrats.
Now we do not approve, as practice, of
giving office to democrats, especially South
en democrats; but still the President is the
Judge in this matter, and Senators, if they
do not approve his judgment, have only to
vote against his nominations. If they re-
jected them, it would be nothing new for
Republican Senate. After the death of
Chief Justice Chase, President Grant had
to try three times before he got candidate
for the high position that was acceptable to
the Senate. No; this last complaint is only
pretext. Only very few democrats have
been appointed to office, and there were
doubtless good reasons in each case, as any
Senator might have learned by calling at
the Executive Mansion. And when it comes
to be understood that the real object and
extent of the late movement was to compel
the President to back down on this point,
preparatory to making a grand assault for
the recovery of the patronage, we think the
best judgment of the country will sustain
the President.