New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1884-09-15
rHr RrtoEV on TRrrH

Colonel Charles Il, Goldman. IN his speech TO
the independent Conference NJ New YORK city,
took occasion go sny that fui ouiaolycai II h
inrl nu mpuamhlo Iot ua To- puppltt MI Hlnino
nH II h. Ia lio or ~ mrl' For onurlyra We
could wish Colonel todmln'H nlundutdol mrhH-
ucmcnt had been lc,n uncertain We Fear II II
far more impossible for the independents To
support Mr.. Blaine than II Is 10 lie. Tor IN
saucci The ind,pndcW newspaper approves
what Mr. Blaine SAYS IN hi, letter of acceptance
upon civil Service Reform, bat adds, " unio-
tlnatcly hc has no rccoH on This subject that
puts him in the class Of rci0rmcrs.'
ON January -, 1874, the House of Repre-
scutativcs vested the appointment and removal
of the official reporters of the House ~
the Speaker Mr.. Blaine was at that
time Speaker. There were seven reporters,
with salary OF $1,000 each. No special
public attention was then fastened upon CWl
Service Reform. Mr. Blaine had absolute con-
troll of these offices. Hi, political method m
this particular ease. a, appears IN the t0HUF-
sioHai Hcc0d, was To- continue all the old and
experienced reporters IN Office, 10 make no 1c-
moyal and no new appointment; ana more thHn
this 10 use all his power Of precedence as
Speaker 10 give, publicly 10 the rule tlc
strictcst civil Service Reform construction. He
announced 10 the House from fine Chair that
" the rule just adopted vests in the Chair the
"arpointmcut and removal of these reporters.
"Whcncycr there is any point Of doubt as To
"vhat the rulc may bc supposed 10 be, 1t Is the
"duty of the Chair 10 give hi, own construction
"ofit The Chair therefore announces that he
twill appoint the existing reporters, and viii
"cousidcr that the power Of removal j, only
vested in him for cause, which he viii have
"entcrcd upon the journal. when the appoint
"mcnt Of reporters is announced it viii bc for
"thi- Congress and for sub, Iu"nt Congresses
"uniH action removing them for cause shall
" be taken 10y the then speaker
The rule had made no limitations for cause
Mr.. Blaine himself put the limitation upon
him.clr and, to that'cNtcut. upon all subsequent
Speakers. If The Independent is enc of the
Gus" to whom lying is impossible. we shall bc
glad to hear how it rccoucios tus action of Mr.
Banc's with its own statement that hc has ",'o
record that puts hmm i'm the class of rciomcH.'
We are perfectly frank in our own czp'au1-
ton. On the part of The ipdVrudcW aud
probably of most Independents, wc bDlicycit to
be- i'm the language of DR.. Johnson, Ignorance
Madam sheer Ignorance On the part of Mr..
Blaine we believe it 10 be, In the language ol
the gentleman who makes this extract from
me Congressional Rccord. that "Mr Blaine.
"nol being little man. has mover found II nee
"cs4ary 10 sccl, public favor 10y potIneus nCiyil
"Scr,ico Bcfoimcr.' MI Curtiss whole polil.
cal capital has been civil Srr,icc Reform bat
Mr. Blaine has nclunlly accomplished more
practical Civil Service reform nj odd mnutc4,
without thinking il worth noticing, than Mr..
Curtis has done with all his professional braun
bent to its production We challenge MI
Curtis to produce single instance in which
Mr. linnc conlravcncd any principle of civil
Service Reform in which ho ever made nm ap-
pontmcnt or caused a removal adverse to the
best interests of the country. We charge Mr. !
Curtis with violating the vital principle ol
civil Service Reform IN rejecting u candidate |
of the largest aud most puccclaiul National ct-
pciioncc. nominated after the abolition Of the |
Unit Rule. 10y The unlIAmmoll,d veto Of the |
people nndndoplng candidate ol no National |
experience nominated by the nclion of tho Unit |
Rulo aud the nupprosnion oi the pcopcn voice. |