New-York tribune., 1886-03-17
BROKEN PLEDGES

President Cleveland said in his recent
message. "Every pledge which have made, by
(which | have placed a limitation upon my
exercise of Executive power, has been faith
" fully rcdeemcd.n The Presidents friends are
now boaStng that no opponent has denied TINS
assertion in all the discussion OF his position, or
"yentured to cast doubt on its accuracy.
Could there hc a more impudent claim ! Scna-
tor Edmunds's speech. from beginning to end,
was an array of prO0f-nOt merely OF assertion
that the President had failed to keep his
pledges SO of other Republican arguments IN
the Senate and elsewhere. \ vast body Df facts
has been submitted to pubic consideration, and
these coucusivcy prove that the Presidents
statement was cOnspicuOusly inexact." Are his
friends 50 duh that they cannot comprehend
that he is contradictcd and placed in humili-
ating position, unless some ill-brei fellow calls
the President liar9 1t is both charitable and
last to assume that the President lid not com
prehend the meaning of the statement he made
or els, did not comprehend the nature OF the
pledges he had broken. Probably he does not
know that such appointments as those OF
Higgins and Thompson, Plllsbury and Chase
or that Just made of Oberly Of Illinois as CIVIL
Service Commissioner, are violations OF
pledges deliberately made by him in
order to secure an election Yet he
either broke those pledges wilfully, i'll appoint
ing such unscrupulous partisan tuckSterS
or spoils seekers, or he did not know what his
pledges meant. 1t may be that he still fails to
comprehend after all that has been said, that
the removal of hundreds of faithful officials for
no other reason than to make room Tor Demo
cratic workers was a violation Of the pledges
he hal made. Bat everybody else knows 1t,
and the President can be excused only on the
ground that he did not know what his words
meant.
1t will perhaps be claimed by his friends that
the common popular understanding of his
pledges was erroneous that he mad in his own
mind a certain meaning which he attached to
them, and that meaning he has not disrcgardcd.
But it would be wise for the Presidents sup
porters not to represent him as a pettifogging
trickster, who says one thing but means an
other He has known ever since.the election,
and knew during the progress of the campaign,
in what sense his pledges were understood by
the voters. If he intended them to be so un
derstood, he is bound by that intent and no
other
The truth undoubtedly is that the President
meant what he said during the campaign, 50 far
as he then understood the matter. He was
lacking in knowledge of affairs, and did not
comprehend at all what reasons would arise for
steps he did not then contemplate, nor did he
fully comprehend the nature and meaning OF
the promises made. 1t was an after-thought,
and discreditablc one, to reckon offensive
partisanshipn a "cause" of removal, in the
sense in which he had promised not 10 remove
men without cause. His message would have
been more manly and honorable if he had said,
" | was not aware of the nature of my duties,
"when these pledges were made, and in order
to do what | consider my duty as Executive,
"have been obliged to take steps not consistent
" with some promises in the sense in which
"then understood them and they were under
"stood by the public That is the most favor
able construction which the public can put
upon his course. He is excused to-day by be-
levers in Civil Service reform, not on the
ground that he has actually kept his promises,
but on the ground that he seems to be trying to
keep them as far as he can consistently with
what he deems his duty in other respects. If
his friends are wise they will not disturb that
excuse, the best that can be made for him, by
calling attention to the lack of candOr and
straightforward honesty shown in his assertion
that all his pledges have been redeemed.