Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1882-05-23
mORE OF MOORE.
How Our Distinguished M. G. Il
Regarded Away From Home.
New York Evening Post.

NV AoAA ANchlH8 IOSt.
Mr.. Moore, a Congressman from
Tennessee, has got a widow named
Mrs. Wilcox turned out Of the Post.
Office Department. She was the
grand -daughter of Andrew Jaokson's
adopted daughter, Mrs. Donelson, and
q widow of a Confederate General,
and was appointed by General Grant
in 1869. The correspondent of the
Herald called on him for an explana-
ton of the matter, and he gave it, and
it was nearly as simple and diverting
as Flanagan's question. He declared
that he wanted the Widow Wilcox
dismissed because she was a Demo-
crat; because she had been in Office
long enough, drawing Republican
pay" and because he and Judge
Houk wanted the place for the widow
of a Union soldier, and because he
was opposed to sentimental appoint
ments." His theory of the civil SER
vice, or his general ideas on the sub
ject," as he called them, he said would
be found in a crude bill" which he
introduced into the House on Jan
uary %, of which the following is the
preamble.
Whereas, the government Of the
United States is a government neees-
sarily of parties, and whereas the in
terests of the successful party demand
the distribution of the public offices
among those who indorse the princi.
pies Of said party; and whereas, under
the existing peculiarities Of our hu-
mar nature, as we'll as the genius Of
our institutions, no party a prosper
under a system which recognizes the
right of one set of claimants to hold
Office continuously ; therefore, be it
enacted" etc.
With these general ideas" it is no
wonder that Mr.. Moore has no pa
thence with civil service reform, So
called" and that IF he has any poll
tics it is practical politics" Thus far
Mr.. Moore had got along swimDliDgly;
he had met his qu%estioner as a man
with no nonsense about him, with a
regular system embodied in a bill.
But here the correspondent became
troublesome, and, in fact, began to
prepare poor Mr.. Moore for destruc
ton. He cunningly asked him first
whether he applied this system to his
private business, and Mr.. Moore had
to acknowledge hat he did not,
because it would be bad for his bust
ness, and because the government
officer, besides doing clerical work,
has to support his party as his princi-
pal duty. The general idea" here
was rather cloudy, but still up to this
point Mr.. Moore had borne himself
like a philosopher and statesman.
But at this point the correspondent
asked him how the doctrine applied to
the Memphis postofice, in which Mr..
Moore was seeking the removal Of a
Republican widoT to make room for
his own brother-in-l law. This was a
cruel question. Here the philoso-
pher collapsed, and the philosophy
all went to pieces. He con-
fessed that he wanted the widow re-
moved for business reasons and gem
eral interchangeable comparative
unimportance Of which is a promi-
nent feature in his general idea
and next because, if his brother-in-
law were put in her place, it would
to stem the tide Of reputation in
Tennessee. But he protested it was
not because he had married his wife's
that he chose him for this great
work, but because his appointment
would ~"antagOnize the party" less
than that of anybody else. The great
est thought in the preamble Of the
Moore bill, was, in fact, that "the,ex-
listing peculiarities Of our human ma
ture" call for rotation in Office, as in
deed they do for an equal division of
all the good things of life. They call
also for the retention Of Union widows
in Office until your wife's brother
wants the place, but no longer.