The Jasper weekly courier. [volume] (Jasper, Ind.) 1858-1922, 1885-06-26

improbable twaddle concerning the
strained relations between the rrcsi-
dent and the Secretary Of State. brought
about by alleged qnarrrls over certain
diplomatic appointments Yesterday We
were advised by the New York Hcrrla
thar ''the President i abdicating hs
constitutional functions and letting hi.
snboriinatcs run him.
This harsh and ANYTHING but respect.
fnl comment j. followed BY an equally
uncallrt-for scoldins "a the effect that
tn people chose Mr.. Cleveland Presi-
dent. not that he should do the At
torney-tscncral or any other Cabinet
officers bidding. and that IL he imagines
he can psit responsibility for bad and IN.
iuiicious appointments upon anybody
besides himself he i very much mis-
taken.
The inspiration 81 this diatribc Il the
selection Of Zathariah Montgomery for
the position Of Assistant Attorney Gen
cral and ~ Mr.. Wicklific for District
Attorney ~ kentucky. al the supposed
bidding 81 Mr. Garland. Now il
may b. that these appo ntments are not
the bcst that could have been made
They arr certainly not a. acceptable 10
the friends oi other applicants A. would
have been the appointment OF those
other applicants: Tut il il be- true that
ihr Pre- isient deferred in this matter 10
the preference ~ the Attorney -t.cneral
j. this convinc NJ dcmon>trat on that
Mr. Garland. in the ease language Of
the Heraid. j. running Mr. Clrye-
land. or sufficient caT>e for \ furious
onslaught upon the Presidents lack Of
Independence?
Ii h. thought il hest to agree with
his Attorncy-General. as he is said To
have told Mr. Carlisle. what right Ii
ANYBODY To insist that he should have
done what he didn't think best and
make some other selection? The logic
Of such criticisms j. simply absurd.
There has never been an Administration
in which the Pres dent did not paw more
or less Difference ID the opinions Of his
Cabinet officers. and the moment that
those opinions ceasr 10 b. worthy Of his
d ference that moment the Cabinet
should be dissolved and new one
formed.
Whether the Presidents appointments
are invariably faultls~ or not j. fair
question for crit cism. but that l. not the
po nj here What we protest against is
the pr~~umpiuous and suspicious
haste with which certain newspapers
seize uTon what they consider
an lnjud cipus appointment as conc u
sire evidence that there i something
wrong with the Government. and that
the President is either exercising his
prerogatives with high-handei AFRO
gance or supinely yielding 10 the ar
rogance Of hi Cabinet officers. which
ever way the writer chooses 10 put il.
The truth II the matter i that the
Administrations i pursuing a policy
which the people generally accept a
wise and just. II may not prove in the
end 70 b. % in all respects. hut the
people are more disposed to give II
fair trial than 10 PREJUDICE and con
denim It on mere suspicion 1t viii be
time enough to d .nonnce the President
when be all lie found 10 have been
faithless 10 his trusts. The newspapers
can far better afford 10 b. equally toll
Grant than = b. continually snarlng
over an arrangement OF minor details
that doe~ not always square with their
individual notions - Washington Post.