The Louisiana Democrat. [volume] (Alexandria, La.) 1845-1918, 1889-07-31
HARRISON AND REFORM.
How Blaine's Shadow Has Violated Hi
Solemnly- Made Pledges.

How Blaine's Shadow Has Violated His
solemnly- Made Pledges.
The St. Louis Civil-Service Reform
Association numbers among its officers
such prominent Republicans as
Messrs. John B. Henderson, Henry
Hitchcock and Emil Preetorius. We
congratulate these gentlemen on the
high sense of duty which has led the
association to express its disapproval
of the Harrison Administration. The
statistics collated by the association
and published in the annual report of
Its executive committee show that
while the average rate of changes in the
fourth-class post-offices was only per
cent. greater under Cleveland than
under Arthur, the Harrison Admins
tration is making changes at the rate
of Is per cent year, or from 1000 to
1900 a week. The highest rate of
changes heretofore in any single year,
as the association shows, twas in the
year ending June 80, 1886, when it
was 362 per cent; but the average
rate under Cleveland was 20 1-3 per
cent; under Arthur, 18 per cent !;
under Hayes, 16 per cent; under
Grants second administration, 10 per
cent, under Grants first, 1S4 per
cent, and in the first year of Grants
about rs per cent"
II must no ranono borod IN oo,e;re.
ing the figures that Mr.. Cleveland
found the service entirely partisan.
There were no Democrats in it, yet on
averaging the changes made during
his four years, it appears that there
is only a small percentage of differ
ence between the average of changes
made by him in order to restore the
equilibrium in the service and the
average made by Republican Presi-
dents in arranging their administra-
ton machines. While this COMPARE
son is highly creditable to Mr..
Cleveland, it is strong condemna-
tion of Mr. Harrison, who in riot
of spoils bossism displaced 11,000
fourth-class postmasters from March 4
to June 16.
"Who then is responsible for this
state of atfair5?" asks the association,
and in answering its own question it
says:
1t may be SAID that Mr.. Harrison can not
have personal knowledge OF all the changes In
q ct hoy Of fbn
ment, and that he can not be held accountable
| for every act Of his subordinates. And this is
| true. Yet there is homely fashion among
the American people of holding the President
responsible for the general conduct OF the
| administration in all its departments and Of
looking to him as the authoritative head to
correct all abuses. In this spirit we may we'll
ask OF the President that he put check upon
this headsman in his work of official decapita-
tion, and that his subordinates may be given to
understand, as he himself has formally de-
clared, that ''only the interests of the public
service should suggest removals from Office"
and that, in appointments to every grade and
department, fitness and not party service
should be the essential and discriminating test,
and fidelity and efficiency the only sure tenure
OF office.
We are confident that General Hen
derson will fully agree with us when we
assert that the President is rightly to
be held responsible for this demorali-
zation. General Henderson, in the
early days of the Administration, went
to the White House and demonstrated
against the Presidents policy of dele
eating to local bosses the Executive
authority to select public servants UNI
der the different departments. The
remonstrance was useless. President
Harrison has deputy in every Con-
gressional district in the country, and
all these deputies are actively coop
Grating with him in using the Offices
in an attempt to control State politics
from the District of Columbia.
If the Administrator has done thia
while it was new in power and while
the pledges 1t had made were still;
fresh, what can General Henderson or
any other friend of good government
and efficient service expect of it. now
that all its pledges have been indecent
ly violated and the worst combination
of bosses effected that the world ever
sawp-St. Louis Republic.