Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1885-06-18
THE PRESIDENTS CRITICS.

THE PRESIDENTS CRITICS.
The Criticisms Upon the Acts of the Adj
ministration.
1t the general public is much given
to aperusal of the criticisms that are
passed upon the Administration from
day to day by editors of newspapers,
who seem to have an intuitive mastery
| OF the situation, or by gossiping poll
| ticians upon the street corners, who APP
pear to think that the country will go
to the dogs unless the Government is
run on their plan, there must be pain
full confusion on the part of the general
public as to what is really the matter.
Upon the one hand we are told that
| the President is so stubbornly set in his
ways and holds the reins so taut over
his Executive household, and insists
with SO much obstinacy upon carrying
out his own ideas, regardless of advice
to the contrary, that there is grave
danger.of rupture and that the Cabin
ct can not possibly hold together for
any great length of time.
Upon the other hand-and we not in
frequently come across the same con-
fiicting and inconsistent opinions in the
same day and the same paper, if not
from the same sOurce-We are assured
in tones of oninous solemnitv that Mr..
Cleveland, instead of exercising the
decision of character and independence
of Judgment with which he has always
been credited, has tamely succumbed
to the dictatorial whims of his consti-
tutional advisers and is permitting them
to perform various unseemly acts, for
which the people will sooner or later
be certain to call him to severe &C.
count
How shall these criticisms be recon-
ciled? By what process will we be made
to comprehend that President can be
self-willed and arbitrary beyond all
reasonable endurance, yet so weak and
vacillating withal as to be nothing more
than cat's-paw in the hands of his
Secretaries? 1t is impossible that both
of these propositions can be true. Is there
any competent evidence that either
one of them has even foundation in
fact?
In Yesterdays Post attention was
called to the obviously frivolous and
improbable twaddle concerning the
strained relations between the Presi-
dent and the Secretary of State, brought
about by alleged quarrels ove;. certain
diplomatic appointments. Yesterday we
were advised by the New York Herald
that ''the President is abdicating his
constitutional functions and letting his
subordinates run him."
This harsh and anything but respect
full comment is followed by an equally
IL IL IL.
the people chose Mr.. Cleveland Presi-
dent, not that he should do the At
torney-Generafs or any other Cabinet
officers bidding, and that if he imagines
he can put responsibility for bad and in
besides himself he is very much mis-
taken.
The inspiration of this diatribe is the
selection of Zachariah Montgomery for
the position of Assistant Attorney Gen
eral and of Mr.. Wickliffe for District
Attorney of Kentucky, at the supposed
''bidding" of Mr.. Garland. Now it
may be that these appointments are not
the best that could have been made.
They are certainly not as acceptable to
the friends of other applicants as would
have been the appointment of those
other applicants; but if it be true that
the President deferred in this matter to
the preference of the Attorney General,
is this convincing demonstration that
Mr.. Garland, in the classic language of
the Herald, is running" Mr.. Cleve-
land, or sufficient cause for a furious
onslaught upon the Presidents lack of
independence?
If he Thought it best to agree with
his Attorney General, as he is said to
have told Mr.. Carlisle, what right has
ANYBODY to insist that he should have
done what he didn't think best and
make some other selection? The logic |
of such criticisms is simply absurd.
There has never been an Administration |
in which the President did not pay more |
or less Difference to the opinions of his |
Cabinet officers, and the moment that |
those opinions cease to be worthy of his !
Difference that moment the Cabinet |
should be dissolved and a new one |
formed.
Whether the President appointments
are invariably faultless or not is a fair |
question for criticism. but that is not the |
point here. What we protest against is
the presumptuous and suspicious
haste with which certain newspapers
seize upon what they consider
IN lnJuuiclouS appointment DIS coHc'u-
sive evidence that there is something
wrong with the Government, and that
the President is either exercising his
prerogatives with high-handed AFRO
gance or supinely yielding to the ar
rogance of his Cabinet officers, which
ever way the writer chooses to put it.
The truth of the matter is that the
Administration is pursuing a policy
which the people generally accept as
wise and just. 1t may not prove in the
end to be SO in all respects, but the
people are more disposed to give it
fair trial than to PREJUDICE and con-
denim it on mere suspicion. 1t will be
time enough to denounce the President
when he shall be found to have been
faithless to his trusts. The newspapers
can far better afford to be equally toll
Grant than to be continually snarling
over an arrangement of minor details
that does not always square with their
individual notions. - Washington Post.
THE SENATE AS A SCARECROW.