The Columbian. [volume] (Bloomsburg, Pa.) 1866-1910, 1885-04-03
JEFFERSON ON REMOVALS FROM
OFFICE.

same question of patronage manage
ment which confronted its founder o,
the commencement of the century and
during his incumbency of the Presiden.
tial Office. The name of that great
man is often vainly invoked TO sane.
ton or to condemn theories or prac-
tices of government which, from theil
connection with party passion or inter
est, constitute subjects of continuing
and ardent debate, and upon which
universal agreement of opinion is not
to be expected. But this announced
views upon any public question, when
duly considered, will always be instruct
i've, and will often afford us safe guid.
ance, even under changed political con.
ditioHs, 10 modern times.
He came to the Presidency at time
when nearly ali public offices were fiji.
ed by his political enemies, by men who
had been active in opposing his cleo.
tion, and many of whom were not well
disposed to republican principles Of
government, or at least were not hope
full of their success. Was the new
chief magistrate, the head of a trium-
phant party, to act with vigor or with
moderation in making appointments to
office, or in removing his political ene-
mics from Office, and by what rules Of
conduct was he TO act in relation there
to The answer to these questions is
furnished by government records and
by his published correspondence.
!. He announced with emphasis his
conviction that 1t was both unreason-
able and unjust that the majority party
of the country should be excluded from
public offices of appointment, and be
compelled to zee those offices filed, al
most exclusively, by their political op.
ponents that this was wrong which
it was his duty, as it was his inclina-
ton, to redress and that he would
proceed to redress it as opportunity
should offer, or should be created by u
proper exercise of the removing power.
1t was his original idea, in pursuing
this object, to depend entirely upon
deaths, designations, and removals for
delinquency, to furnish vacancies for
the exercise of the appointing power.
{ Works, Nv. 45l.) But upon further
consideration and experience in admin
istration, he came to hold that remov-
ais might be made for other reasons
than official delinquency or misconduct
in Office, and particularly for "election-
eering activity, or open and industrious
opposition to the principles of the gov
ernment, legislative and executive" or,
in other words, "for using the influence
of Office to destroy the confidence OF
the people in their government Six
teen removals we're made by him upon
this ground during the first two years
of his administration. Works, w.
466, 485.
President Cleveland, in his civil SER
vice reform letter of December 25,
1884, has given more expanded state,
ment of this Jeffersonian doctrine,
where he speaks Of persons in office
who shave forfeited all just claim to
retention because they have used their
places for party purposes, in disregard
of their duty to the people, and because
=. they have proved themselves
offensive partisans and unscrupulous
manipulators OF local party manage
ment."
2. He declared that the appoint
ments made after HE oaon election, by
his predecessor, did not confer upon
the appointees any claim to continuance
in office that the attempt to impose
them upon him as bis assistants in ad-
ministration was Objectionable and Of
fensive, and that he would not regard
the persons 80 appointed even as candi-
dates with claims to be considered by
him as custodian of the appointing
power. So far, therefore, as such ap,
pointees were not protected by con
stitutional tenure of Office, their ap-
pointments would be treated as if they
had not been made. Works, w. 3Sl,
383, 1894, 546.)
8. 1t was his opinion that Ministers
of the United States abroad, should be
recalled after a reasonable time OF SER
vice, for reasons which he said had
commanded the approval of President
Washington, as well as of his own de-
liberate judgment. He therefore re-
called his friend, Mr.. Short, and others,
from foreign service, and in letters,
dictated by kindly feeling, explained to
them the grounds of fixed policy upon
which he proceeded. (Letter to WI
liam Short, Works, w. 4l3.)
4. He was unquestionably opposed
to the Act of 18th May, 1920 (Which
fixed statutory term of four years for
many offices), for reasons stated in his
letter to Mr.. Madison, of goth Novem-
Der, 1920, but it is equally certain that
he would not have advised disregard
of the statute by the Executive. if his
opinion as to its enforcement had been
expressed. The power of removal,
vested in the President by the Consti-
tuition, cannot be DESTROYED or impaired
by statute, but the manner in which
.commissio ms shall go out, and the time
for which they shall issue, may be re
gulated by law without impinging
upon executive power. As matter of
policy however, it is unwise and impro-
per to remove officers of the United
States during statutory terms of service,
unless for good cause, public or per-
sonal, and the announcement and en-
forcement of rule against it by the
Executive must, in view of modern
abuses of the appointing power, be re,
garded as step, and an important
step, in the direction of genuine re-
form.
What shall be regarded as good
cause for removing an officer of the
civil service, is question of profound
interest to the student of American pol
itics, and one of continually increasing
Importance.
3. His opinion against nepotism.