Lancaster daily intelligencer. [volume] (Lancaster, Pa.) 1864-1928, 1880-08-12
lamraster f1ltelltgenrer..
THURSDAY EVENING. AUG. u. 1890
Civil Service Reform Sham.

however. those cml0enC CIVIL SERVICE
reformers, Messrs. Schurz, Evarts and
Curtis, have ever and again given in their
adhesion to their party-with some
misgivings rs to its position on other
questions-on the pretext that on this is
sue Of supreme Importance, as it seems
to them, the Republican party gives the
better promise to the country. Their
own record does not afford such evidence
OF sincerity and consistency as to make
them sufficient surety for their party nor
their support of its candidates any guar
antec that in their election the cause of
civil service reform would he advanced.
1t will be remembered that ut the men,
orab!c Fifth Avenue hotel conference of
independent public men in 1876, Mr..
SchurZ and his confreres declared most
emphatically against any candidate for
president who. however favorably
judged by his nearest friends, is
not known to possess those quail
ties of mind and character which
the stern task of genuine reform
requires,'' thereby conspicuously mean
ing Hayes. But after a good deal of
dalliance Schurz supported Hayes and
was rewarded for it, by previous arrange
ment it is generally believed, with 4 place
in the cabinet. And yet the most signal
feature of the civil service rs organized
by the present administration has been
the liberal and unfaiiing reward of every
man tainted with the fraud of fostering
it into Office. The counsel fees of the
lawyers, the services Of the visiting
statesmen, the iniquitous work of the
returning boards and the pettiest rascal
ity of the meanest scamp among those
who compassed the electoral fraud have
all been paid by prostitution of the
civil service to meet the obligations.
The promises conveyed to the public
in "Ciyil Service order No. H. have
been kept to the ear only to he regularly
broken to the hope. The abuse of Office
Bipartisan and factiOnal ends goes on
the same as before, the enforced assess
ments of the Otlice-hOlders and the syste-
matte blackmail of the government en-
plOyecs. The cabinet ministers them
selves set the example of defying and re-
pudiating this order, and from the day
that EvartS and Sherman went over to
New York to aid the election for gov
ernor of the man whose removal from
federal Office they had secured OH the
ground of his abuse of it-frOm that time
forth the humblcst clerk in the depart
ments has felt that under this administra-
tion civil service reform is 4 hollow pre-
tense.
Mr.. Garlield's slufiling on this issue
gives no assurance that the refOrmers, as
they call themselves by way of distinc-
tion from the stalwarts, have any reason
to expect him to carry out their prOfessed
principles. These were never better
stated perhaps than by Mr.. Garfield him
self in the atlantic Monthly so late as
July, 1877. In that article Mr., Garfield
said:
''The present system invades the inde-
pendencc of the executive, and makes him
less responsible for the character of his
appointments it impairs the efficiency Of
the legislator by diyerting him from his
proper sphere Of duty, and involving him
in the intrigucs of aspirants for office q; il
degradeS the civil service itself by destroy
ing the personal independence of those
who are appointed; it rcpels from the scr
vice those high and manly qualities which
are SO necessary to a purc and efficient ad-
m;nistration and, finally, it dcbauches
the public mind by holding up public Office
nc fl,o 10 ward Of NOR, n,rtv zeal
''TO reform this service is one Of the
most imperative duties of craftsmanship.
This reform cannot bc accomplished with
out 4 complete divorce between Congress
and the executive in the matter of ap.
pomtments. 1t will he proud day when
an administration senator or representa-
tive, who is in good standing in his party,
can say rs Thomas Hughes said, during
his recent visit to this country, that though
he was on the most intimate terms with
the members of his own administration,
yet it was not in his power to secure the
removal of the humblcst clerk in the civil
service of his government"
Had Mr.. Garfield repeated any such
declarations in his letter of acceptance,
he might he classed by Messrs. Schurz
and Evarts and Curtis rs one who was
disposed to put into practice the theories
they profess. But Mr.. Conkling and
Mr.. Cameron and Mr.. Logan would not
have stood it for moment. They would
support no man who denied the rights of
the local bosses in their several states.
So in his letter of acceptance Mr.. Gar
field denied himself, repudiated the civil
service reform theorists and gave him.
self completely into the hands of the stall
warts. There was no misunderstanding
his meaning when he said i'm his letter of
acceptance:
"Thc executive should therefore seek
and receive the information and assistance
of those whose knowledge of communities
in which duties are to he performed best
qualify them to aid in making the wisest
CHOICE
He yields to the sort of civil service
which Horace White says has been " Or
ganized upon strict principles of priva-
teering" and to the men who have ''voted
down with jeers'' every effort to reform
it. No wonder Mr.. Curtis pronounced
his letter g Inadequate and disappoint-
ing,'' and that the Ercning Post deplored
the intellectual and moral paralysis :"
which had befallen him. And yet Mr..
Garfield's eyaSiOnS and turniHgs about