National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1886-06-10

The House adopted resolution from the
committee on rivers and harbors, directing
the Secretary Of War to report whether the
right Of drainage into the Louisville and
Portland canal should be conceded to the
city Of Louisville, and then went into com.
mittee Of the whole on the legislative, exc
The whole day was tsseat.rped in debate
upon the appropriation for the civil service
commission, the amount Of which is the
same as that given for the present year,
$21 400. but a proviso Is added by
the committee on appropriations re-
quiriDg the Qualifications OF the en-
tire list Of applicants from each state who
had passed examination. This requirement,
the committee insists, is not change OF
existing law, but is simply limitation on
the expenditure Of the money. 1t was upon
this proviso that the somewhat heated de-
bate on Tuesday occurred, and again yester-
day the House was kept on It's feet, as It
were, listening to the caustic attacks made
upon the one hand against civil service re-
form, and, upon the other, against the
of executing the law, while at the same
time 1t is evading the'law In various ways.
Mr.. Compton, of Maryland, did not pro-
pose to answer the speech ofill.omen made by
his colleague Mr.. McComas). Time would
show that the prophecy made by that gen.
tleman was not correct. When the admin
istration had done its duty, and when the
House had done its duty, 1t would be seen
that the figures presented by his colleague
were not correct. He proposed to address
himself to the civil service reform provision
OF the bill, and he expressed his admiration
for the courage OF the committee on ap-
propriations In placing the provision on
the pending bill. In announcing his oppo-
sition to the rules adopted by the civil SER
vice commission, he gave voice to the senti-
ments Of the people he represented.
He yielded to no man, high or low, IN
Office or out Of Office, in the Entertainment
of an honest, earnest, and sincere desire
for the thorough, economical, and honest
administration OF the civil service OF the
government, but this, he argued, was not
accomplished by the existing civil service
law. The law had been case
of "heads. win, tails you lose"
party was to have the law and the offices;
In case Of Democratic success, that party
was to have the law without the offices.
That law was, he commended, unconstitu-
tional, and he protested against 1t as an
anti-democratic and anti.republican usur-
patton of the peoples rights. He was
against the law as 1t stood, radically and
irreconcilably.
Mr.. Hit, Of Illinois. commented on what
he termed the extraordinary provision
which had been forced upon an appropria-
ton bill to nullify the civil service law. II
It were not ruled out on point OF order,
he hoped that the House, representing the
country and the advanced thought OF the
day, would defeat 1t with square vote.
The law had been tried; 1t was no longer a
speculation, and 1t had, upon the most
thorough trial, been found TO be conducive
to efficiency, honesty, and purity of the
civil service. The committee on appro-
priatlons did not refuse to appropriate for
the civil service commission, but It coupled
the appropriation with proviso which
broke down the barrier which prevented
spoilsmen from appointing their workers to
office.
lie believed that the response OF the coun-
try to the provision would prove quietus
to the attacks upon the civil service system.
He briefly reviewed what he asserted to be
an indirect violation of the law by the
Postmaster General and the commissioners
of pensions, and commended the more d.
rect course pursued by the Secretary of the
Treasury in the appointment OF Higgins.
lie also criticised the action OF the Presl-
dent In appointing Mr.. Oberly as civil SER
vice commissioner, declaring that that gen.
tleman was the very type OF aparty boss.
Mr.. Bayne, OF Pennsylvania, protested
against the provision and called attention
TO the fact that the change proposed to be
made coula be made by the President. To
put this proposition on the bill was to vote
a want OF confidence In the President and
his Cabinet. He believed that the Presi,
dent was doing his level best TO carry Out
civil service reform and that most, II moi
all Of his Cabinet, were endeavOrlng III
good faith 10 execute the law. The only
gentlemen who were complaining of tho
civil service rules were the members OF the
"kitchen cabinet'-who they were he did
not know.
Mr.. Price, OF Wisconsin, analysed tn,
bill and criticised many Of the items OF the
appropriation as being eXtravagant.
Mr. Springer, of Illinois, defended the
commissioner OF pensions from the charge
OF having violated the civil service law, aud
declared that every appointment made by
that officer had been strictly In accordance
with the letter and spirlt Of the law. lie
went on to show that many OF the special
examiners appointed had been Republicans,
and called attention to the fact that Com.
missioner Black lad retained eight Repub-