The Redwood gazette. [volume] (Redwood Falls, Minn.) 1873-1940, 1881-05-26

plain right anqsSworn duty of Senators by con.
senting to whaVwe believe to be vicious and
hurtful, or ~ assigned positions of disloyalty
to the Administration which we helped to
bring In, and the success of which we earnest.
~ wish, fof Very reason and motive which
can enter into the case. We know of no theory
avowed by any party which requires such sub
mission as 10 now exacted. Although party
service may be fairly considered in making a
selection Of public officers, it can hardly be
maintained that the Senate Is bound to remove
without cause incumbents merely to make
places for those whom any individual, even
President or member Of his Cabinet, wish
es to repay for being recreant to others or
servioeable to himself. Only about
two years ago the Senate advised
that General Merritt be appointed Collector at
New York. It IL understood that among the
Senators who 90 advised was Mr.. Window,
now Secretary Of the Treasury and head of
the Department whose subordinate General
Merritt 10. Another known to have given the
advice was Mr.. Kirkwood, now Secretary of
the Interior. It is said that, like the Post
master-General from our State, these Cabinet
omcers were not taken into consultation
touching the removal of General Merritt. But
their sworn and official action of Senators is
none the less instructive. That the late Secre-
tary OF the Treasury and the late Administra-
ton up to Its expiration Qess than ten weeks
ago. approved of General Merritt as an officer,
Is we'll known, and it Is not even suggested
that any citizen had petitioned for his remov-
al. or that Official delinquency on his part is
the reason for it. In place of an experienced
officer In the midst Of his term fixed by law, it
Is proposed suddenly to put man in who has
had no training for the position and who can
not De said to have any special fitness for its
official duties.
In the inaugural of President Garfield, de-
lvered on the 4th Of last March, stand these
words:
...;r The Civil Service can never be placed on a
FOR the good of the service itself, for the pro-
tectlon OF those who are intrustcd with the ap-
pointing power, against the waste of time and
the obstruction OF public business caused by an
1nordinate pressure for place and for protection
OF 1ncumbents against intrigue and wrong, 1
snall at the proper time ask Congress to fix the
tive Departments, and prescribe grounds up
on which removals shall be made during the
term for which the incumbents have beeen ap-
pointed"
How good the distinction is which would
make major Offices a prey to intrigue and
wrong, and shield minor offices from like
havoc, and whether the collectOrships of the
country should belong to the exposed or to
Assuming General Merritt to be an officer of
average fitness and honesty, it might be rea.
sonably argued that all Senators should. with
alacrity, advise his displacement by q man of
obvious superiority. Possibly it might be
said that all should advise the selection in
General Merritt's place of a man who, without
superior fitness, had rendered his country or
even his party conspicuous and exalted
service. The case In hand does not be-
long to either Of these classes. The vocation
of Mr.. Robertson, and his legislative and
professional experience and surround
ings, do not denote superiority in the
qualities, the knowledge, business habits and
familiarity with the revenue laws and system
Of the United States which might make him
more competent than General Merritt to col
lect the vast revenues and administer the vast
business pertaining to the Port of New York.
Certainly he cannot in this respect be held an
exception to the rules Of right and consisten-
placed the public service. We know of no
personal or political service rendered by Mr..
Robertson SO transcendent that the Collect
orship Of New York should be taken in the
midst of term and given to him as recon.
pense.
Mr.. Robertson is reported by the New York
Tribune to have declared that his nomination
was a reward for his action as q delegate to
the National Convention. If Robertson in his
action was influenced by O sense of duty, IL
he voted and acted his honest convictions, it
IL difficult to see what claim he has for any re-
ward, not to speak of such great reward. The
action of which an estimate is thus invited is
understood to be this: Robertson and sixty
nineother men accepted from the StateConven-
ton certain trusts. They sought and accepted
the position of agents or delegates to Ma
tiOnal Convention. The State Convention de-
clared plainly the stated judgment and policy
to be observed and supported by those COM
missiOned. To this declaration all selected
as delegates gave an implied consent, but
several of thcm, in addition, made most
specific personal pledges and engagements to
exert themselves in good faith throughout to
secure the nomination of General Grant.
They made this pledge as the means of OBJ
tanning their own appointments as delegates,
and they did, as we both personally know, OBJ
tain their seats in the National Convention
upon the faith Of their personal statements of
their earnestness and fidelity. The obligation
thus assumed we understood to involve the
integrity as much as the obligation of one who
receives the proxy Of q stakeholder in
. corporation upon the pledge and
promise to vote as his principal
would vote. Whether Mr.. Robertson
was or was not himself bound not only under
honor and implication, but by expressly CIV
ing his word, becomes quite immaterial in
view Of the claim made for him. 1t is insisted
that he "organized the bolt" or, as it has been
sometimes stated, "he was the leader of the
bolt" This Is to say that he invited, persuad-
ed, induced others whom he knew had given
their word, and had obtained their seats by
doing 80, to violate their word and betray, not
only the Republicans assembled in State Con-
vention, but the Republicans of their districts
as well, who had trusted in their honor. Who
ever counsels and prOcureS another to do
dishonest or dishonorable act must share with
that other the guilt, and should share also the
odium justly attached to it.
Weare, therefore, wholly unable, upon what.
ever ground we put 1t, to see justification for
ourselves should we become parties to using
the public trusts which belong to the people, to
reQuite such service in such modes. But the
appliances employed to effect the results set
up new standards of Responsibility and invade,
as we believe, the truths and principles on
which the separate and coordinate branches
of the Government stand A Senator has his
own responsibility. He is amenable to his
State, and to the body of which he is member.
He is bound by his oath to advise and con-
God. Whatever or whoever else may con-
strain him, he is to be exempt from Executive
menace or disfavor on the one hand, and Ex-
ecutive inducement on the other. Long stand
ing on the orders Of the House of Commons
has been a declaration that a member shall
suffer expulsion who even reports the wishes
of the Executive head of the Government to
influence the votes of members. The British
Constitution is not more jealous than ours in
this regard. To give advice, and honest, in
dependent advice, rs to an appointment pro-
posed is as much the right and duty Of Sena-
tor ~ it is the right and duty Of the President
to propose the name. Be his advice one way
or the other, it is no more an act of disre.
spect or treason to the nominating power
than the verdict of a Juror or the decision
Of . Judge. The idea that the Senate is
simply to find out what is wanted and then do
It we cannot believe safe or admissible, and
thus far no party has dared or descended to
oct up such test Of party fidelity or al.
legiance. In this instance prominence has
been given to the subject, and such distrust
has been expressed Of the correctness of our
positions that We think it right and dutiful to
submit the matter to the power to which alone
We are bound and ever ready to bow. The
r ~0AAp~ & e. Ia t. T.