National Republican., 1885-07-10
What Are the Limits ?

How far federal officers may be allowed
to participate In state campaigns without
being liable to dismissal for ''oirensive par
tisanship" is becoming an interesting prac-
ticGl question.
We shall in few weeks have campaigns
in full blast in a number Of states. Among
the prizes to be contended for are seats in
the United States Senate. The popularity
Of the federal administration is also to be
IN some measure determined by the results
Of the approaching state elections,
1t would seem, therefore, to be high time
for a plain, authoritative declaration show
ing to what extent the federal oiiiceholder
may be political worker.
May he take part in primaries? May he
represent his neighbors as q delegate in
nominating conventions? a? May he attend
and be an active participant in political
mectingsg May he, when not inconsistent
with the discharge of his official duties, go
on to the stump and speak for his party and
its candidates. May he give money
the money paid him out Of the federal
treasury for public work-to swell the cam
paign fund Of his party? And If he cannot
contribute part Of his salary to that pur-
pose, may he give any other moneys which
he may happen to possess or be able to
borrow May he permit any political talk
ing to be done in any government building
or Office under his official control? If so,
how many persons may do such talking in
such place and how long may the talking
continne at one time9
nh ". II e. IL
ton in feeling manner indicative of deep
solicitude for the welfare Of the admins
tration and the rights of free American
citizens. The Sun states that 'at the
banquet in Boston to Senator Logan, a short
time ago, number of Republican Office
holders were conspicuous by their absence.
Neither the postmaster, the collector, nor
the United States marshal attended, and it
is suggested In various New England news
papers that they stayed away for fear their
presence at dinner to the Republican can
didate for vice president would be regarded
as evidence Of offensive partisanship."
The San submits that II this New Eng
land view Is correct, "a public officer is an
offensive partisan If he goes to banquet
given in honor of n recognized leader of the
party TO which he belongs" and the editor
rightly concludes that "such an application
Of the new doctrine will deprive many Dem
ocrats of good dinners In the course of the
next four years. If 1t is improper for a
Republican ofliceholder to attend such a
political feast it must be improper for a
Democrat
There are certain manifestations of often
sive paltisanslip about which there can be
no reasonable difference Of opinion. No
officer of the government should be per-
mitted to abuse his official authority in the
supposed interest of any party, No fed
eral officer should manifest partisan spirit
or bias in the discharge Of his public duties.
All federal officers should treat those with
whom they are officially brought in contact
with courtesy uninlluenced by partisan
feeling, 1t is easy to make these gem
cral statements, for they are automatic.
But such propositions will not do for
guides to the many thousands Of Demo-
Gratis who are 20 be orhave been inducted into
Office in place of ''offensiye partisans. :"
AS a navigator cannot get along with moth
ing more definite than textbook on nayi-
gatlon, but must have a chart, so these new
Democratic officials viii lnd that the Presi-
dents Chistmes letter aud the Villas sup