Year: 1874

We doubt If the full significance of the
Presidents action in the removal of Mr.. Cluss


Engineer of the Washington Board OF Public
Works, is appreciated by the people at large
President Grant has done nothing in the
whole course of his administration so thor
oughly indicative of purpose to be absolute
in his possession and exercise of power, and
to regard nothing but personal motives and
the suggestions of his own caprice in appoint
ments and removals. Under any other admin
istration such an act would be pronounced a
deliberate and inexcusable outrage, not alone
upon the officer whose disgrace has been
attempted at the same time with his removal,
but upon public sentiment and common JUS
tice.


Here was Mr.. Cluss, witness on the stand
before committee of investigation. His tes-
timony implicated in fraudulent transactions
men who are known to be President Grants
intimate friends and associates. He had al
ways hitherto borne a good character as an
honest citizen and faithful officer. lie testl-
fed before q committee made up of the friends
of the persons compromised by his statements;
he was subjected to merclless crOsS-ex-
animation by attorneys noted for bullying
propensities, who had in their assault upon
him not only the silent sympathies but
the active aid and cooperation of men,
bers of the committee who were sitting as
Judges in the case. With no adequate motive
for telling untIuths, and an absolute certainty
of being discovered if he did, LIE seems to
have narrated true and straightforward story.
1t was very damaging to the friends OF Presl-
dent Grant in the Board of Public Works.
These friends, instead of waiting, as honest
men could well afford to do, to the conclusion
of the testimony and the report of the COM
mittee, met together, and in a boiling rage
passed resolutions denOuncing Mr.. Cluss as
perjurer, and demanding of the President his
removal This upon the face of it was not
the transaction of men actuated by a sense of
Justice or conscious of their own integrity.


But what does the President dot Does he
give Mr.. Cluss a chance to be heardf Does
he wait till he has official knowledge of Mr..
Clusss testimony Does he wait till the COM
mittee has reported Does he wait, indeed,
until that gentleman has descended from the
witness standi Not a bit. Upon this in
famous charge by men who themselves were
accused of crime, with nothing but their word
in contradiction of Mr.. Cluss's sworn testimony,
and before the witness had left the stand, the
President approves their accusation of perjury,
indorses it as substantiated, removes from
Office the gentleman who has had the temerity
to accuse his friends of fraud, and in the
haste of his acquiescence in their demand
violates an express statute law in the appoint
ment Of a successor.


This is the President who 80 long refused
to comply with the request of the respectable
people of New York for the removal Of Mr..
Thomas Murphy, and who retained Secretary
Richardson in office until he could make him
a Judge, because he did not propose to an
swer public clamor or remove an officer under
charges. The testimony in the District of Co.
lumbia investigation has satisfied all thinking,
unprejudiced men that there was rascality,
fraud, and corruption in the administration of
District affairs. The Administration organs,
with the exception of one or two in Washing
ton which shared the plunder, do not deny it.
But the President approves charge of per-
jury against a gentleman who has testified in
the case, simply because the District Ring assert
that he testified falsely, and bundles him out
of Office without so much as a hearing. Talk
about personal government! This is personal
government of the most irresponsible and un-
scrupulOus sort. But the discussion of it is
as calm and dispassionate as though it was of
no earthly consequence that President Grant
should give official Endorsement to charge
of perjury at the demand of personal friends
whG are themselves accused of crime.


40 afectionate youth tried to play the part of