The Democratic advocate. [volume] (Westminster, Md.) 1865-1972, 1885-02-28
Public once.

Public Office.
The government of the United States is
a government of the people, through their
representatives and agents, elected and APP
pointed, to conduct It's affairs. In coun-
try like ours, Of such vast area and a pop
ulaticn Of ifty-iye millions Of people, there
must necessarily be large number in the
public service, and these are all directly
responsible to the President, or to the heads
of departments, from whom they receive
their appointments, and these, in turn, are
responsible to the people. There are no
privileged classes in this country; all are
equal before the law, which gives exact
justice to all, special privileges to none.
One man is as good as another, their men
tai and moral status being equal. One
man has as much right to public office and
preferment as another, their qualifications
being the same. And all have right to
aspire to public service, if they 50 deter
mine. Where, then, is the propriety of
denouncing those who indulge such aspira-
tons The public Offices must be filed,
and when applicants present themselves,
properly vouched for and supported by men
of intelligence and discrimination, the work
of filing them is facilitated and made easy.
The sentiment that ''the Office should seek
the man, and not the man the Office is
well enough, in respect to heads of depart
ments and the more important places of
public trust, but when it comes to the sub
ordinate places, more than one hundred
thousand in number, how could the office
seek the man in such cases ? If there
were no applicants, the work of engaging
public agents would be greatly retarded,
and the public service hindered. Somuch,
by way of practical consideration of
popular but specious apothegm, which needs
only slight investigation to show its i'm
practicability.
There is nothing discreditable in the
public service or the faithful fulflment of
public duty. On the contrary, it is honor
able. But the fashion Of the day is to
decry Office holders and Office seekers, until
the public mind has become schooled to be-
lieve that the one is dishonorable and the
other criminal. In this way the public
service has been brought into reproach, and
the respect due to it destroyed. Sage or
scientist never uttered more palpable truth
than that enunciated by Mr.. Cleveland,
that epublic Office is public trust. He
that discharges that trust with fidelity to
the public interests, therefore, deserves well
of his country. 1t is only when there is
lack of fidelity on the part Of incumbents,
that public censure is due. 1t follows, as
a logical sequence, that if the faithful per-
Torrance of duty in public office is honor
able and worthy of public commentator,
the aspiration to fill such Office worthily is
also honorable. The avenues to public
preferment may be crowded, but are not
all the occupations, trades, callings and pro-
fessions, equally crowded? Would man
dishonor himself, on that account, by seek
ing employment in them? Why, then,
should he discredit himself in public esti-
nation, by seeking to find public employ
ment /? It is unreasonable and unthinking
to so regard it. But the crush for office,
the awild hunt after office, is echoed and
reehcoed on every hand, until the denun-
citation lavished upon it has made it, in
some degree, discreditable to ask for Office
at all, OF to aspire to any place, elective or
appointed. Is it not apparent to the least
observant that such state of things is cal
culated to detract from the honor and dig
nifty of the public service, and consequently
to work injury to it2 We must not be un-
derstood as advocating an improper desire
for public employment. There is proper
mean in all things. We have only Under
taken to combat the hue and cry against
office holders and Office seekers, as not only
contrary to a reasonable view of the sub
ject, but detrimental to the public interests.