The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1886-06-09
THE CIYIL-SERyICE RULES.
A Proposed Change in the Exclusive Interest
of Democratic Seekers for Office.

WASHINGTON, June 8-The House went into
cammittee of the whole-Mr. Blount, of Geor-
gia. in the chair-on the legislative, executive
and judicial appropriation bill.
Mr. Holman wished to call attention to the
startling rapidity with which the expenditures
of the government were being increased. Pass
ing on to consideration of the clause making
an appropriation for the Civil-service Commits
sion, he stated that the amount appropriated
was the same as that given for the present fiscal
year-$21, 400-but there was provision added,
requiring the certifcation of the entire list of
applicants from each State who had passed ex-
animation. This requirement, he argued was
not a change in the existing law, but was simply
a limitation on the expenditure of the money.
Mr.. Butterworth inquired whether the pro-
vision did not nullify the most important pro-
vision of the civilservice law. and whether its
object was not to enable the appointing power to
select his partisan friends.
Mr.. Holman answered most emphatically IN
the negative. 1t was, he said, matter of JUS
tice to the applicant who was successful in pass
ing the examination.
e. B. Taylor. of Ohio inquired whether the
main object of the provision not to secure
the appointment of more Democrats
Mr.. Holman replied that. so far as the motive
was concerned, he must answer in the negative.
He would say, however. that if the provision
had the incidental result of increasing the num-
Der of Democratic employees, he did not think
the gentleman ought to complain. He was con-
WINGED that that would be the result, but his
motive was justice to the applicant and justice
TO the government.
Mr.. Findlay. of Maryland, inquired whether
the object of the provision was not to enlarge
the scope Of choice for political purposes
Mr.. Holman-To enlarge the scope of choice,
/ admit, but for governmental purposes and for
purposes of even-handed justice.
Mr.. Findlay-I am opposed to certifying all
the eligibles up to the appointing officer. l am
in favor of the administration being carried on
with the highest regard to honor. without regard
to party.
Mr. Springer, of Illinois, thought that before
the Republicans accused the Democrats of IN
due partisanship, they should be willing to
divide the classified Offices with the Democrats.
Until the classified service was half composed of
Democrats he thought that the gentlemen on the
other side should be silent on the subject OF
civilservice reform. Until this time the Demo
cratic party would continue to press their point
Mr.. Cannon Of Illinois, argued that the pro-
posed change in the rules of the Clyil-service
Commission was out of order on an appropria-
tion bill, being plain change of law. He re-
ferred to the declarations of President Cleveland,
before and after his inauguration. in favor of
civil-servce reform, and crticising him for tais
ing no action In regard to the circular sent OFT
by the Postmaster general which, he declared,
mad started at every crossroads in the country
smut-machine to bring charges against Repub-
licans. General Black had so manipulated the
civilservce law as to violate every provision of
it. What did the President do? He got mar
ried. [Laughter.l Had the gentleman from
Illinois Mr. Morrison or the gentleman from
Pennsylvania mr. Randall been President.
and, fifteen months after their declaration in ia
vor OF the civl-servce law, that law violated
by subordinate, they would tell that subordi
nate to step down and out. If the Democrats
wanted to repeal the law, let them do it in
manly way. and not undertake to nullify it by
putting rider on the appropriation bill.
Mr.. McComas, of Maryland, declared that civ
ii-service reform in Maryland. with tits Hig-
ginses and Thomases, had been a mere farce.
He then turned his attention to tariff matters,
and said that the project of the new Morrison
bill to reduce $5 900 900 of the surplus based
on the assumed truth that the annual eXpendit-
ures would not exceed those of 1885. which were
1905. 1916, $40. But Secretary Manning reported
that as compared with that year of Republican
rule the receipts in 1886 were $25 900 900 less
and the expenditures $4,000, 600 mos1 He es-
timated that. instead of surplus there would be
deficit of 1874 $50 $50 After six months ses-
endar told startling story Of no surplus but of
deficiency. The total appropriations for 1885
would exceed 1884. $50, 332. The estimated reve-
nues for 1887 were 1862, 542. 252. thus showing
Q6Uclt OF more IMAM pA1.UUu.UVO larlH re-
vision was therefore impossible now. He re-
viewed in detail what lie termed the pretense of
administrative economy, declaring there had
been an increase of salaries all along the line.
The committee then rose.
Mr.. Oates, of Alabama. from the committee
on the judiciary, asked leave to report back the
Edmunds anti polygamy BILL but Mr.. Game. of
Utah. objected The point was made that
delegate had not the right to object, and the
Speaker took the point under advisement
The House then adjourned.
The Senate transacted no business of import
ance