The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-02-25

the Legislature ought not to have the gen.
eraI power to create and fill offices of it's
own creation, and that if the opinions of
the great thinkers Of our country had been
given full force it would have no such
power
r.. w. Mcbride.
I am opposed to having the management
of our benevolent, penal or reformatory
institutions treated as a legitimate spoil
of political warfare. To do is vicious
in principle and demoralizing in its in
fiuence on officers and employees. So far
as concerns the appointing rover, as a
Republican ] stand by The principles CT
the party. From the days of Governor
Morton to the present, the Republican party
has contended that under our State Con-
stitution this power is an executive func-
ton. If SO, it belongs to the Governor,
and should be left in the han.ls of the
one chosen by the people 10 discharge the
functions CT that office regardless of his
political opinions. The Constitution places
the power in his hands, rot as the poll
tician, but as the chief executive. In the
case Of State ex rel. Jameson ct al. VS..
Denny, 118 Ind. $50, and il that CT the
city of Evansville ct a.. VS.. Blend It al,
lis Ind, 49, the Supreme Court sustained
this contention and decided in express terms
ludt tiiG pOWCT o. appointment 10 once
was an executive function. All of the then
judges of that court coucurred in that cpln-
ion except Judge Mitchell. For the party
to now change front is not only tenayal
of principle, but it will assuredly fail of its
purpose. The Governor will resist and the
Supreme Court will no doubt follow the
numerous precedents found in the opinions
of Judges Coffey, Berkshire and Odds, and
sustain him.
John Nj. Butler.
] am simply unalterably opposed to going
back on what the party believes in. be-
lieve the action of the caucus relative to
the State institutions is detrimental to the
Republican party, because 1t cannot be
otherwise than detrimental to any political
party to violate its party pledges, ignore
its record and spurn its promises, voiced in
Its platform and reinforced as it has been
by every speaker on the stump for three
decades. If promises and pledges in the
party platforms meant anything, they
meant what they said, and it is the abso-
lutte duty of the Legislature elected upon
these party pledges and promises to abide
by them in letter and in spirit. 1t seems
suicidal to face about and ignore these
peated declarations of Republican principles
for the temporary party advantage, If it can
be called advantage, to be derived from TAX
ing away from the Governor the appoint
ing power. The party, in order to do this,
Is obliged to turn it's face against it's plat
forms and records and against the action
of every Governor from Morton down. 1t
will certainly be a dearly purchased adj
vantage, and that it is one that will be tenn
porary 1 have not the slightest doubt, be-
cause the people are not the temper to
abide by any such action on the part of
the Legislature. The day of reckoning will
certainly come. and 1t will be sad day
for the Republican party, In my judgment.
j. A. Lemcke.
As a hunt for the spoils, the caucus ac-
tion is not worth the powder. Patronage
Isl always the cause of more weakness
than strength and there is no quid pro quo
in the contemplated policy regarding the
State institutions The caucus places the
party in the position of doing something
which not only Will do much more harm
than good among party workers, but also
damages. the reputation and moral stand
ing of the party among the conservative
class of voters who are not party men, and
who now voting with u.s. I believe that
in politics, as with individuals, agreements
ought to be maintained in absolute good
faith, and the caucus action is not in line
with this principle. 1t proposes to compel
the party to violate it's agreements with
the people The proposition in the Shiveley
bill, to require the Governor to appoint
two Republicans and two Democrats. is
SD fair in It's promises for good and so clear
ly points the way out of the difficulty of
having the boards still Democratic in their
control with the Governor appointing boards
OF three members. that 1t is worth a trial.
This bill would itself legislate out the OBJ
jectionable superintendent and new board
OF two of each party could reappoint such
OF the superintendent and employees as have
a record of good service. Unless the caucus
action is changed / am fearful tina. much
harm will result