Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1881-05-07
THE NOMINATIONS.
Newspaper Comments on the Withdraw
al Of the New York Nominations.

New YORK, May c. The Tribune on the
withdrawal of nominations from the Senate,
SAYS: We do not understand that the with
draw al of the names of Woodford, Tenney,
PAYNE, McDougal and Tyler means any in
tention on the part of the administration to
prescribe any republican element or to en-
courage any form of factional strife. 1t
would seem to signify only this, that while
Conking has declared open hostillties against
the administration. and boasts he will effect
rejection of Robertson's nomination, the
President thinks it desirable the result of
this attack should be made known before
other New York places are filled. Ii may be
necessary, in case sufficient senators should
follow Conkling in his reckless course to
reject this absolutely unobjectionable candi-
date, to make some further arrangement
as to other offices to satisfy the just expec-
tations of that portion of the party in the
State who have not surrendered their free
will wholly to Mr.. Conkling. The next
move must come from the senator and his
friends, and must be made in the Senate.
The World says: From the point of view
of the republican civil service reformers there
is not much perhaps to be said for Gartield's
withdrawal of nominations for marshals and
attorneys in this State since the appointments
conspicuously failed to secure the placating
of Conklng. and since Conkling has not been
astute enough to get them confirmed, there
fore expressing his disgust with the admin
istration.
The Times saws The withdrawal by the
President of the New York nominations eX-
cept Robertsons, would be an excellent act,
if he had found since making them that the
gentlemen named were unfit for their places.
When we remember that 1t was announced
apparently with the best authority, that these
nominations were originally made to secure
party harmony" by pleasing Conkling, we
were forced to conclude that they have been
Withdrawn principally because they have
tailed for that purpose. In such case the
withdrawal is in effect an act of political and
personal welfare, which is not entirely I'M
worthy of the Presidents office but for its
own ends, signally ill-tmed and ill-planned.
At the time of Robertson's nomination we
pointed out that between a Conkling me-
chine and Garfield or a Garfield Blaine ma
chine, the people of the country would find
very little to choose.
The Herald, after condemning the nomina-
tions of both Chandler and Robertson, as
impoltic and unworthy, saws it is the highest
constitutional duty of the Senate to reject
these nominations, and thus stamp with its
solemn disapproval these acts of the Presi-
dent, which in their very nature are founded
upon the very mischevious assumption that
he is at liberty to do with the offices what he
pleases, to use them to reward his adherents
or to punish those he dislikes, and that he is
not bound to consult the public interests in
any way, in making his appointments. There
could be no more dangerous precedent set by
President, than Garfield attempting this in
the beginning of his administration. If the
Senate should confirm these nominations it
would make itself a party to what is nothing
less than crime against the country.
The Suns view is similar to those of the
Heralds.
The Star says: 1t is more than likely that
Garfield will conduct his own administration
hereafter, regardless of the plight of the I'M
horsed stalwart chief, who finds himself in
the ditch, at last, and who, since all other
appeals have failed, has finally had recourse
to that of which he knows the least of any
"a question of honor.