Year: 1876

and Mr.. Sherman in so invective a spirit and
with such bitter partisan vehemence that
readers of the telegraphic summary were led
to infer that Senator Gordon had overstepped
the proprieties of discussion and made
violent party harangue. AS there was moth
ing in the brief summary of his speech that
seemed calculated to provoke the fierce
philippics of his assailants we were curious to
read the full debate rs officially reported in
the Congressional Record. After careful
perusal we find nothing TO Justify that re-
markable outburst of party virulence- We
are less surprised that Mr. Morton should
begin such an assault than that Mr.. Sher-
man should support it, for the last named
Senator has reputation for moderation and
candor.


General Gordon's speech was really marked
by singular elevation of tone and forbearance
to turn the subject to party advantage. In
stead of making the recent frauds topic of
party elimination he only attempted to erect
barriers against their repetition. The reme-
dies he proposed would, if adopted require
the remuneration by the democratic party of
the maxim that "to the victors belong
the spoils" General Gordon's propositions
were-first, to regulate the whiskey tax by
the capacity of the fermenting tubs.
and collect it monthly or weekly in
advance and, second, to make the
internal revenue officers irremovable ex-
cept for dishonesty or incapacity. The first
of these changes is no doubt open to some of
the practical objections raised against it by
1,,.t. he
nection with party politics. Mr. Sherman
virtually conceded that it was based on
sound idea by his statement that the Ca
pacity of the fermenting tubs is now care
fully measured and recorded, and that it
is one of the chief tests of the honesty
of the reports made by distillers. But Gen
eral Gordon laid the stress of his speech on
the other part of his proposal, thinking that
a separation of the revenue from party poll
tics is the essential and indispensable re-
form.


There is no reason why republican Sena-
tors should have worked themselves into
rage of party hostility against General Cor
don for offering such proposition. It's
plain effect would be to debar the democratic
party from filling the internal revenue ser
vice with its own creatures and tools if it
should come into power next year. Such
proposition from a prominent democratic
Senator should have been received with
grateful satisfaction by honest republicans.
Most certainly it should not have been made
the occasion of q furious partisan attack on
Senator Gordon and Of dragging in such
irrelevant topics as his former connection
with the rebel army and the local politics of
Georgia What have these to do with
the propriety of disconnecting the revenue
service from party politics? Why should
General Gordon be browbeaten and
aspersed and his military record be raked
up against him for speech favoring in one
branch of administration the same civil
service reform which President Grant was
ut one time understood to favor and the
republicans in Congress made a pretence of
supporting in all branches? The scorn
poured on General Gordons proposal of
non-partisan revenue service by Messrs.
Morton and Sherman demonstrates the
hypocritical insincerity of the republicans in
Congress when they professed to support
the same kind of reform and to favor its ap-
plication to all departments of the civil
service. If of any value at all it would have
the most salutary effect in its application TO
revenue officers, as proposed by General
Gordon, for this is the department where it
is most necessary to guard against abuses.
The HERALD, which has been the steady,
jealous and sincere advocate of civil service
reform, will not look on with indifference
when Senator is assailed with violent par
tisan abuse for no other offence than q wise,
temperate and courteous advocacy of an i'm
portant reform in the collection of the rev.
enue.


What could be more forcible and pertinent
than General Gordon's explanation of the
fact that England can collect a tax of 81 so
on distilled spirits without frauds or evasion
while we fail to collect one-third of that sum ?
"The reason" said Senator Gordon, ''is
this:-Engand appoints her officers solely to
collect her taxes, while here they are ap-
pointed to collect the taxes and to aid the
party which happens for the time to have the
appointing power This hits the mark in
the centre, and il is no wonder that it was
greeted with applause in the galleries.
which the President of the Senate
checked by loud cry of "order." The
non partisan tone in which this view
was urged may be made apparent by
few brief quotations from Senator Gordon's
speech. II wish" said he, ito repeat my
profound conviction that whatever party
shall be called to administer the govern
ment and shall proceed to appoint men to
Office and TO collect the taxes because of the
influence they can bring to the party we
shall be forced 10 blush nt those revenne