statutes: nor shall any officer not in the execu- | throw in that class men who have had hardly any education, men who will say, "I went to school until I was 11 years old," or "I went to school in the winter," or something of that kind. We have to throw them in that class tive branch of the Government, or any person merely employed as a laborer or workman, be required to be classified hereunder; nor, unless by direction of the Senate, shall any person who has been nominated for confirmation by the Senate be required to be classified or pass an examination. Now, Mr. President, recurring to what I have said as to scope of this bill, to the officers who are embraced in it, to the avoidance of the question of removal and tenure, I have only to say that the machinery of the bill is that the President shall call to his aid the very best assistance, with or without the concurrence of the Senate for that is a matter about which gentlemen would differ and upon it I have no very fixed opinion-that the President shall with the concurrence of the best advice which he can obtain, form a plan, a scheme of examination free for all, open to all, which shall secure the very best talent and the very best capacity attainable for the civil offices of the Government. The method adopted in the bill is by competitive examination. That method has been imperfectly tried throughout the country. I have here the statement of the postmaster of New York who has given much attention and has had great experience in this matter. I have here his statement that the business of his office increased 150 per cent. within a certain number of years, and the expenses increased only 2 per cent. To be specific Says Mr. Pearson while the increase in the volume of matter has been from 150 to 300 per cent. the increase in cost has only been about 2 per cent. Mr. Graves, whose testimony I read before, has stated as the result of the efforts which were made by General Grant during the period that he was allowed any funds for the purpose of putting this scheme into operation, that the expenses of the Departments here can be reduced at least one-third. I have heard it said that this system of examination proposes to present only a scholastic test; that it proposes only to give advantage to those who are collegebred, and have had the advantage in early life of superior education. The committee investigated that subject to some extent, and I have here the result in the city of New York. Says Mr. Burt: That is the class who have received a common-school educationand it rather reduces the average standing in that category. As to the matter of age we have very thoroughly exploded that objection. There have been some young men of 21 and 22 who have come in, but the average has been above 30, and it is astonishing that it is the men above 30 who make the best time on examination, who show a facility to get through work quickly. He goes on to say: Yet about two-thirds of the appointees had a common-school education; had not even an academic education. Thereupon the chairman of the committee asked: Is it from that you get the value of the ele ment of experience and natural force that I spoke of? Mr. BURT. Yes, sir; it shows itself there apart from the question of elaborate education. Of course these examinations must be proper; of course they must be regulated upon common-sense principles; of course they must be conducted to test the fitness of the men who are to be appointed to particular offices. You have tests everywhere. To-day the law requires that there shall be a test of examination in the various Departments here in Washington. They are pass examinations; they are imperfect; they are insufficient; they are not thorough. Mr. Graves himself says that the only examination in his case was ed over his shoulder while he was writing that the superior in the Department lookand said, "I think you will pass." That was when he entered the service twentyodd years ago. If you have examinations why not have If you have competitive examinations? private pass examinations, why not have open examinations? If examinations are made in the Departments by subordinates of the Departments, why not have them made by responsible examiners amenable to the authority of the President under a system devised by the best intelligence that can be supplied? ination spoken of as if it were something I hear the system of competitive examextraordinary. Within the last fifteen Taking seven hundred and thirty-one persons years it has gotten to be a custom that I examined, 60 per cent. of the appointees select- might almost say is universal that when a ed from them had been educated simply in the member of Congress has the right to apcommon schools of the country; 33 per cent. point a cadet to West Point or to the Nahad received what they call academic or high-val Academy he asks his constituents to school education; and 6 per cent. a collegiate education. In all the statistics in regard to com- compete for it. Formerly it was never mon school education there is one little weak-done; it was looked on as the mere ness resulting from the fact that we have to perquisite of a member of Congress. I appointed a gentleman to West Point who versation upon the floor of the Senate-I grdauated at the head of his class, and believe if we argue this question upon the now is the active and vigorous spirit of the lower plane of mere partisan advantage we Military Academy. I appointed him sim- Democrats ought to support the measure. ply upon my own personal examination It has been said that this abandonment of and knowledge. It would not be done the spoils system will retain in office the now; it could not be done now; the pub-appointees of the Republican party. I lic sentiment is against it. The public conceal nothing; I state it in my place in sentiment of the district that I then repre- Senate, and before my fellow-Senators who sented would not permit it; but open com- are of the other persuasion, I do not think petitive examinations are demanded, and it. There is no proposition to extend the everybody having the requisite qualifica- term of office where it is now fixed, nor in tions of age and health and vigor can any wise limit the constitutional power of compete for the appointment. removal from office. The proposition is simply and only that where a new appointment shall be made the element of fitness shall be decisive. Can any Democrat object to that? Why not apply that system to the Executive Departments of this Government? What earthly reason can there be why when you desire to appoint the best and fittest man for the place that is vacant he should not subject himself to the competition of other people who desire to have that place? Of course, as I said before, this all goes upon the basis that there shall be reasonable examinations and reasonable competition. Nor are there any aristocratical tendencies about this system, as I have heard suggested; for while it does not in any wise create an official caste it does in words and in effect, open up the possibility of the public service to the poorest and the humblest and least influential in the land. Mr. President, I desire to say only one word further. I have spoken to-day under great disadvantage, and perhaps I may have omitted things that I shall desire in the course of this discussion to lay before the Senate. But I desire, Mr. President, to follow out for one moment the line of thought which I indicated when I said that I believed this system would be of great advantage to the country, and that to me it was no objection, that I believed it would be of great advantage to the Democratic party. The suggestion has been made here that it might be better to lay this matter over until after another election, and that the mutations of parties might fill, under the old system, the various Departments with members of the faith to which I belong. Aye, Mr. President, but the next Presidential election may not have that result, and it will not have the result, in my honest conviction, unless we do two things: First, respond to the demands which the people make upon the Democratic party now in its condition of probation; and, second, disarm that great body of officials who as disciplined armies go forth to control the Presidential elections. I believe, and I am only excused from making this remark because of what I have heard publicly and in private con How many Democrats are there in office now? How many will there ever be under the spoils system? The Republicans have possession of the Government for two years and more. How many Democrats will be put in office during that time, except on the merit system? Not one. But if this system be fairly inaugurated and administered within one year there will be fifty where now there is one. It has been said that the abandonment of the spoils system will exclude Democrats from office when the day of our victory shall come. I do not think it. On the contrary, I believe that the adoption of this policy as our party creed will hasten the day of the victory of our party and its adoption as a law will under any administration fill many offices with Democrats. I think it will bring to our aid very many men not hitherto of our political faith who believe this reform a vital question in our politics. I think it will disarm and disorganize and neutralize the trained bands of office-holders who have wrested from us, as I have said, at least two Presidential elections. And finally, repudiating utterly, as I do, that the animating spirit of the Democratic party is the love of spoils, and that its cohesive principle is that of public plunder-repudiating, I say, that doctrine, I think the Democrats throughout this land-I know that in my own State they can-will stand the test of any examination, and in a fair field will not come out second best. Who shall do them the discredit, who shall do this party, now numbering at least half the people of this country, the discredit to say that they can not stand the test of merit for official position and promotion with any equal number of men in any party of the country. I have detained the Senate much too long, and yet I must add that the very best aid to any system of reforming the service is in the most rigid application of the democratic theory of the Federal Consti tution and Government; that its powers are all granted; that the subjects on which it can act are very limited; that it should refrain from enlarging its jurisdiction, or even exercising admitted but unnecessary powers; that it should scrupulously avoid "undue administration." Add to this the election by the people to local Federal offices, and there will be little necessity and little room for other methods. * * * * * And to insert in lieu thereof "appointments to the public service aforesaid;” so as to read: Appointments to the public service aforesaid in the Departments at Washington, shall be apportioned, as nearly as practicable, among the several States and Territories and the District of Columbia, upon the basis of population as ascertained at the last preceding census. This amendment has been discussed, The PRESIDING OFFICER. The pend- and I do not care to detain the Senate in ing question is on the amendment of the further discussion of it. It opens up the Senator from Massachusetts Mr. the public service in all its grades to comHOAR] to the amendment of the Senator | petition, not only from those within but from Iowa [Mr. ALLISON]. MR. PENDLETON. The Senator from Iowa is not in his place at this moment, but gave me authority to withdraw his amendment. The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there be no objection, it will be considered as withdrawn for the time being. MR. PENDLETON. I now move to strike out lines 22 and 23 of section 2, as follows: Third. That original entrance to the public service aforesaid shall be at the grade, and appointments thereto. those outside of the Departments. The objections to the provision that entrance shall be at the lowest grade, and higher places shall be filled by promotions only, are so strong that I desire to perfect the bill by striking out this clause at this time. At the proper time I shall move to strike out the clause in relation to promotion, if it shall seem necessary to accomplish my purpose. I wish entrance to the public service to be open at all grades to every one whether he may be now in office or not. The amendment was adopted. RELATIONS BETWEEN THE SENATE AND EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENT. Speech of Hon. John J. Ingalls, of Kansas, in the Senate of the United States, Friday, March 26, 1886. THE Senate having under consideration the resolutions reported by Mr. EDMUNDS from the Committee on the Judiciary, relative to the refusal of the Attorney General to furnish copies of certain pa pers Mr. INGALLS said: Mr. PRESIDENT: Contemporaneous construction of the Constitution, fortified by long usage and acquiescence, undisturbed for more than seventy-five years, has to my mind incontestably and impregnably established two fundamental propositions first, that under the Constitution of the United States the power to appoint in cludes the power to remove, and that both these powers are vested in the President of the United States, subject only to the power of the Senate to negative in cases of appointment; and, second, that where the tenure of an office is not fixed by the Constitution it is held at the pleasure of the Executive. I therefore take up this argument where the opposition leave it: I begin where they close. I concede all that they demand as to the constitutional power of the Execu tive upon the subject of appointments to office. If it shall appear that the report of the Committee on the Judiciary is inconsistent with these declarations, that the report and the resolutions to which we are now asked to give our assent in any manner impair or infringe upon, or are in derogation of these admitted high executive prerogatives, then I shall submit to condemnation, for my signature is appended to that report. So far as I have been able to unravel and disentangle the complicated array of argument by which it has been attempted to destroy the force and effect of the report of the Committee on the Judiciary, I understand that the objections are practically four: First, that by the action of the majority of the Senate an attempt is made to invade the prerogative of the president by demanding his reasons for the suspensions from office that he has made. To that I interpose upon the threshold and in the vestibule of this argument an absolute contradiction and denial. The President of the United States in the message that he voluntarily, of his own motion, sent down to this body, starts out with an absolutely unfounded imputation upon the position of the majority. He says that the Senate has been from time to time, in various ways, through committees of the body and by personal importunity, appealing to the Executive to give his reasons for the suspension of officials that have been reported to this body with the designation of others to fill the places thus to be rendered vacant. Sir, I deny it, and I now challenge from any supporter or adherent of the administration the exhibition of a word, or syllable, or justifiable inference upon which that allegation, so often repeated with so much variety of iteration, can be properly or justly founded. The effort has been ingeniously made to shift the issue, to darken council by words without wisdom, and to make it appear that there has been a deliberate purpose and intention on the part of the Senate to interfere with the recognized prerogatives of the Executive by demanding his reasons for suspension; and unless I hear some Senator while this debate is now proceeding and while I invite the statement-unless I hear something said in support of that averment, which I deny, and which I affirm has been made for the purpose of clouding this controversy in popular estimation, I shall assume that my denial is not to be met. Again, sir, it has been alleged in debate, in the public press, by intimation and declaration, and it has been the basis of many studied arguments in this Chamber that there had been demands by the Senate upon the executive for private papers in the cases sent down for consideration. I deny it. I contradict that statement by an appeal to the record; and before that great tribunal by whom this issue is to be tried and determined, I allege that that averment is without foundation. There has never been in form or in substance, directly or indirectly, expressly or remotely, any demand made by any committee of this body upon the Executive or upon the head of any Department for the production of private papers; and I shall be glad in the front of my explicit denial and contradiction if some one of the advocates, some one of the champions of the administration, will point out, before this controversy is concluded, when, where, and how there has been any demand made by the Senate upon the President of the United States or upon any head of a Department for the production of private papers. That issue was brought in here by the administration. It is said that a guilty We have conscience needs no accuser. been told of those who "fear in every bush an officer. Sir, it was the interior consciousness of the administration out of which was evolved this phantasy, this farcical allegation, that there was an attempt. on the part of the Senate to compel the production of private unofficial papers and communications in the possession of the President of the United States. No Senator doubts that the President occupies an absolutely independent position, and none would desire under any circumstances to interfere with his admitted prerogatives. I shall strip this controversy of its fallacious incidents. I shall clear away the undergrowth of misrepresentation, sophistry, and false pretenses, that has hitherto obstructed the pathway of our consideration of the real issues that are involved in this contention. With my consent it shall not hereafter be averred before the popular tribunal that is ultimately to decide this question that there has been an indefensible and insolent attempt to impair the constitutional prerogatives of the President of the United States. Another allegation has been that while this controversy has proceeded the Senate has been inactive, interposing partisan objections to the transaction of executive business, to prevent the execution of his high trusts by the President of the United States. I yesterday had compiled from the records of the executive office, for the purpose of showing what has been done in this particular, a statement, public under our rules, which shows that from the 25th of January, 1886, to the date of the last executive session there had been confirmed by the Senate four hundred and ninetythree nominations of officers sent down by the President. Never in any single instance where there has been a vacancy, occurring by resignation, expiration of term or proper removal upon which we could properly act, has there been an instant of delay. The Senate has not inquired whether the nominee was a Democrat or Republican, but has proceeded vigorously, industriously and steadfastly in the performance of its constitutional duties, and if there has been inaction or non-action upon nominations, I shall show before I conclude my remarks that it has been invited by the administration. Again, it has been alleged that the action of the majority of the Senate is instigated by the purpose of keeping Republicans in office; that we are moved by partisan considerations to thwart by all means in our power the efforts of the Executive to transfer the official patronage of the Government to the party that was placed in power by the votes of a majority of the people. I am not authorized to speak for others, but for myself and for those who have accredited me here, I cannot submit with patience to such an intolerable accusation. Mr. President, the Republicans of Kansas are Republicans. They are neither afraid to be so classified nor ashamed to be thus described. They do not covet any qualifying or palliative epithets. Their attitude is neither apologetic nor defensive. They have an unconquerable pride in their political achievements, in the history they have made, in the triumphs they have won. For twenty-five years they have stood upon the skirmish line, neither asking nor giving quarter. They are Republicans not by inheritance, not by tradition, not by accident, but from conviction; and they are as stead fast in defeat as in victory. They are partizans, intrepid, undaunted, uncompromising, and they can give reasons for the faith that is in them. They believe and I believe that for the past quarter of a century upon every vital issue before the American people, secession, slavery, coercion, the public credit, honest elections, universal freedom, and the protection of American labor, they have always been right and that their opponents have always been wrong; and, while they concede unreservedly patriotism and sincerity to their adversaries, temporary repulse has not convinced them that they were in error. There is neither defection nor dismay in their columns. They are ready, they are impatient to renew the battle. Animated by such impulses, it is not singular that they should feel that no Republican can hold an appointive office under a Democratic administration without either sacrificing his convictions or forfeiting his self-respect. share the same temper and spirit. From 1854, when the Territory was organized, down to the 29th of January, 1861, when the State was admitted, if there was a Republican holding any appointive office it was an inadvertence; and if from 1861 down to 1885 there was a Democrat holding an official position requiring confirmation by the Senate, it was an oversight; it escaped the somewhat vigilant scrutiny of my colleague and myself and those who preceded us here. Therefore, Mr. President, I am not of those who believe in non-partisanship in politics; and I should be recreant to the high trust confided in me were I to refrain from declaring my conviction that political parties, energetic, vigorous, and well-defined, are indispensable to the success of free popular governments. Wherever the life of States is freest and most irrepressible, there party spirit is most active and aggressive. It is by the conflict and collision of political parties that the latent and richest powers of the State are made manifest; and those whom I represent have no sympathy with the dogma that it reflects glory upon a statesman to affect independence of his party, or that it is an indication of virtue in a citizen to belong to no political organization. Political parties are social groups in the nation, allied by common purposes and kindred aspirations for the accomplishment of beneficial results. When parties perish this Government will expire, for we all understand that in this country the only government is the party in power. Here is no dynasty, no ruling family, nothing corresponding to the functions of government under other systems except the party Accordingly, sir, when a little more than that is for the time being intrusted by the a year ago a Democratic administration votes of a majority of the people with the was inaugurated, those who were in public execution of their will. And, sir, when a station began with one consent to make majority of the people declare that there excuse to retire to private life. They did shall be a change of administration, it is not stand upon the order of their going; necessarily implied that there shall be a they trampled upon each other in a tumul change of those agencies through which tuous and somewhat indecent haste to get alone political administration can be made out of office. There was no craven cry for effectual. It is useless to juggle and palter mercy; no mercenary camp-follower fled about this matter. A change of adminisfor shelter to the bomb-proofs of the tenure-tration is a change of policies and methods, of-office act; no sutler crawled behind the fragile breast works of civil-service reform for protection. They lost their baggage, but they retained their colors, their arms, their ammunition, and their camp equipage, and marched off the field with the honors of war. If at the expiration of one year a few yet remain in office, rari nantes in gurgite vasto, it is because the victors have been unable to agree among themselves or been unable to discover among their own numbers competent and qualified successors. Mr. President, candor compels me to say that the Democracy of that State and the Chief Magistrate is entitled to the co operation of agents and ministers who are in sympathy with his opinions and the doctrines which he is chosen to enforce and maintain. Sir, unless the President of the United States is to be a mummy swathed in the cerements of the grave, he must have powers commensurate with his duties. He is charged to "take care that the laws be faithfully executed," and unless he has the power to select the agencies through which the laws are administered, through which the revenues are collected and disbursed, the post-offices conducted, the Indians sup |