National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1882-05-22
Is IL a CIovcn Foot =?


Senator Mitchell, of Pennsylvania, has
Eet an example of civil.service reform by
leaving the Senate, neglecting the duties
of the Office which he holds, and raising
his voice in Pennsylvania in revolt
against the party which elected him. He
nid sometime ago that he owed his al
!eriance to the Independents. II will be
remembered that he was chosen as the
outcome of the split at Harrisburg in the
winter of 1SS0-'S1, and that it was the
united Republican party which elected
him. How he can owe allegiance to the
Inderendents we cannot understand,
unless he then entered into n
compact with them to cheat the
majority into his support, and then,
when a Senator to desert. What security
they took of him for the performance of
this trcacherous part whether oral or
written, is immaterial. Like Mercutio's
wound, ait will do" 1t is not to be sup
posed that he left himself any freedom of
action. Ifhe had he could not now have
been persuaded, in the absence of all de-
cent preteXt or excuse, to conspire with
cranks and knaves against the party
which has the confidence of the great
body of the people. Between the field of
honorable duty as Il Republican Senator
and the nasty sty in which ours and
swine jostle each other for the bones and
ofial Of politics what room was there for
hesitation or argument?
40, or
But it reserved some quantity of choice
To serve in such difference"
The revoltin Pennsylvania is an avowed
demand for some of the Federal Offices
It makes no pretense of harboring Il
thought upon any subject but the love of
office. Vociferation against q machine
which keeps them out of office, denun-
citation of all who will not say that
Mitchell should be boss"-what else
is heard of?
At the meeting addressed by Senator
Mitchell the blatant Postmaster Merrick
also lifted up his voice. The affair had n
pronounced smell Of bread and butter.
But the Senator dropped some remarks
that irresistibly take us back to the time
of his election. The Independent move
ment had no independence. II was the
formation of a personal party. 1t was
not for any Pennsylvania. 1t was for
a man outside of the State. 1t was less
for success than for vengeance. 1t was
not in the interest of General Garfield,
who had then been chosen President and
was most anxious to be sustained by
Senate and House. 1t was rather the
handiwork of men who had rallied ia
another candidate at Chicago, and who
seemed to resent opposition to him as
treason 10 king having divine right
to rule.
The following report Of Senator Mitch
ells speech, delivered at Wellsboro', Pa,
on Saturday last, which we find in the
New York Times of yesterday, is most in
teresting:
Senator Mitchell spoke an hour and half II,
said that James G. Blaine was the man whom Tho
People desired The oligarchy crushed out thC
will of the people, hence has risen the Indcpcnd
ont organization. Some OF the best men in there
publican ranks at Washington were in hearty ac,
rOrd with this movement. The speaker made
modest but timely illusions TO the fidelity with
which he had sought recognition for the will o
the Independent Republicans Of Pennsylvania
The bane of American politics was the idea that
the available man was the coming man. Garfield
was the embodiment Of all that was meant by true
ciyil-seryice reform. The speaker deHCd Mr.. Cam.
eron or any one else, TO say he had asked for any
Office or political reward. lie Tccited Genera
Wadsworhs views of civil service reform ant
party factions and commended them to the voter
tfTioga County. The speaker finished by defninI
the purposes Of the Independent party In Pennsyl
vauia as being not against persons r individuals
but against an autocTacy, machine rule, an
bossism. The Democracy, however, need not tax
800 much courage from the Independent ng
against Cameronism. The Independents woul
win The movement had come for all time, an
was going TO stay and win, because il was in IN
right.
James G. Blaine, having been thu
loudly called by recreant Republican
United States Senator us the man t
avenge whose wrongs the independen
organization has risen, owes it to hi
friends to place himself at their head, o
owes it to himself to repudiate them Al
together. Which will he do? Wha
has he done? Who are "some Cf he be-
men IN he Republican ranks al Washington
who are, according to Senator Mitchell
speech ain hearty accord with thi
movement" This movement" is
conspiracy against the Republican part
to displace it with another party j
Senatorial herald proclaims, in its nam,
war to the death, and says it has com
"for all Time"
What dreadful words Let the col
Bpirators be uneaTthed, If Mr. Blair
remains silent after MI. Mitchell's osteI
tatious fourishing Of his name upon ii
rebel oriAammc of war he will give coli
TO the suspicion that he was engaged
an effort to break up the Republic,
party Of the Nation after the election
Garfield by destroying it in detail, begi
uingwith the breeding Of deadly feuds