the spur and excitement of an aroused public opinion, to unite in laying down for the permanent welfare of the country a weapon of offense and of defense which had come down to them from the past, and whose present use in the immediate future might seem to be so convenient. I believe the adoption and inauguration of this scheme, if it shall prove successful, as I confidently expect, will be regarded in the future by the American people almost as the adoption of a new and a better Constitution."

Mr. Brown, of Georgia, opposed the civilservice reform vigorously. He said: "I admit it is very important that there be a better system of administration inaugurated than we have had for many years past. I do not think, however, that the bill now before the Senate, if passed, will inaugurate any such system. I think it will prove a mere delusion. If we pass it we excite popular expectation, and popular expectation will be greatly disappointed in the workings of the system. I have heard the British system spoken very highly of; many eulogies passed upon it. It has been said by advocates of this bill-probably not on the floor, but again and again outside of the chamber-that we should adopt something similar to that system, if not the exact system itself.

"Now, Mr. President, the forms of the two governments are entirely different, the circumstances are different, and the surroundings are different. The system that may work well there in a limited monarchy, the policy of which is to maintain an aristocracy, even a landed aristocracy, is not appropriate to a republican form of government like ours.

"In Great Britain the executive is hereditary. The incumbent derives his right, not by election of the subjects or citizens of that country, but by birthright. The upper house of the British Parliament is not elected, but those who occupy seats there, unlike this body, are dependent upon the accidents of birth for them, not upon any special merits or personal qualifications that they may have, but the duke takes his seat because he is the son of the former duke.

"That is not our American system. It is very consonant, however, with that system to adopt a civil-service rule that, while the executive is for life and hereditary and the higher branch of the legislative department holds for life and is hereditary, will make the subordinate officers hold for life. I say it is consistent and compatible with that system. It is not so here. Under our republican system no man takes anything by hereditary right, but the way is open to the son of the humblest peasant within the broad limits of our domain, if he has merit and energy and ability, to occupy the highest position in the Government. Our theory is that men are to be promoted on account of merit and qualifications. It may not always be carried out-of course it can not always be but that is the nature of the sysVOL. XXIII.-12 A

tem and that is the general practice. It is compatible, therefore, with that system to leave the changes in the legislative department, in the executive department, and in every department except the judicial, to the frequent mutations of parties and to the supposed merits of the competitors who compete for the prizes. In all the departments, legislative and executive, qualification is supposed to be looked to. Election of Representatives and the higher officers is the general idea. Why in the face of that should we establish for the subordinate officers in the different executive departments and in all the larger offices within the limit of the United States a system of lifetime tenure for the very large class of persons who fill those places? I say it is not compatible with our very form of government. It is one step in the direction of the establishment of an aristocracy in this country, the establishment of another privileged class.

"It may be said, however, and I believe that sentiment was uttered only a few days ago, though not in the language I use, probably, that it takes away from persons who hold these positions the inducement to be active politicians. In some cases that might be the working of it; but bear in mind, Mr. President, it leaves it in the power of every one of them to become an active politician, and if the spirit of the system is carried out as claimed by the Senator from Massachusetts (Mr. Hoar), the officers can be as active as they choose on one side, and one side alone, and run no risk of losing their positions. It builds up a powerful class supported out of the Treasury of the United States, out of the taxes of the people, and places in their hands the power, if they choose to exercise it-and there is a great deal of human nature in man, so that they probably would exercise it-the power to do much to control the future rulers and destinies of this Government.

“I am not very fresh from my reading of Roman history; but as I recollect it there was a period in the history of that government when it became necessary to establish the prætorian guard to protect the ruler against the populace. It would naturally enough have been claimed that that guard would take no part in the politics of Rome, and yet in the workings of time that prætorian guard became the master of Rome and assumed control of the government. As they protected the sovereign, they dictated who should be the sovereign, and for a large enough amount of money they would displace one sovereign to make room for another. How do we know that we may not build up a similar class here when we build up a lifetime aristocracy in office, or when we establish a lifetime tenure of office? It is contrary to the very genius and spirit of our Government.

"If there be really in the popular mind a demand for any such bill as is usually termed civil-service reform, it is a bill to make perina

nent the positions of those who hold offices, to confine removals to cause alone. The class who ask for it, I think, are a very small minority of the American people. At the same time they ask for it in that spirit and with that purpose, and they would consider themselves mocked if this bill is passed containing no protection for the incumbents against removal without cause. What good does it do as a measure of reform if the power of removal is unlimited and without cause at the mere will or whim of the appointing power? The civilservice reformers who are most clamorous for action, and who are in earnest about the matter, would consider such a measure, if that is all it means, as a trick, a sham, a delusion.

"But it requires a competitive examination, say the Senators on the other side, before you put a man into office. There again the bill is a cheat and a mockery. It does no such thing in spirit and substance. For fear there might come a day when a Democratic Executive would administer the affairs of this Government, and that day might not be very distant, there is a careful provision in this bill that it shall apply only to the lowest class who are to hold office. There shall be a competitive examination for the lowest grade only; that is free to all; and the Senator from Massachusetts who took his seat a few minutes ago very earnestly stated that that was one of the strong features in it.

"Now, I believe that there is a very large number of employés in the departments at present, occupying different positions in them, some of them high positions, who are not fit for those places, morally, intellectually, or in any other manner; but the charmed circle is not to be disturbed. If there chances to be one of the lower clerkships vacant, then the doors are thrown wide open by this bill and every American citizen may come up and compete for it. It will not do to go higher than that, for too many Democrats might get in. You Democrats can come up and compete for the lowest clerkships that are to be filled; but if a vacancy occurs above that, then the Republican employés and officers already in office, and they alone, can apply for the advancement or promotion. That is the civil-service reform that this bill gives to the country; that is the share that the Democratic party gets in it. I repeat it, under the provisions of this bill the competition is only general for the lowest office that can become vacant. There a Democrat stands a chance to get in this lowest position, but if fifty vacancies occur above it only the present incumbents, the Republican office-holders, can compete for the promotion. That is what it holds out to the Democratic party. That is our share in its benefits.

"Now, I am going to talk plainly to Democrats. It is not required for us to mince words here, for the country very well understands this whole question. The Republican party have had the offices of this Government for

the last twenty-two years consecutively. The Executive has been Republican, and they have had the distribution of the offices and places. They still have it. True, an avalanche has swept over the country, and with it the strongest condemnation of the practices of that party. It is true this was in the off year, and not the presidential year, but prudent, sagacious men on the other side of the chamber understand this as well as we do on this side. If we make no great blunders-and I know I have heard it said on the other side that they rely a great deal on Democratic blunders, for we sometimes make them-unless the Democracy is guilty of great folly on some important questions there can be, to my mind, and I think to the minds of Senators generally, but little doubt that the next President of this republic will be a Democrat.

"I am speaking now to Democrats. How do you go into that campaign? Suppose you put my honorable and worthy friend from Ohio (Mr. Pendleton), or my honorable friend from Delaware (Mr. Bayard), or any other one of the prominent and able gentlemen mentioned for the place, in nomination for the presidency, and you go before the Democratic masses of the United States and tell them that you are handicapped; that all the offices that amount to anything, the higher and more important places, are already disposed of. Disposed of how they will inquire. Why, the Republican party have had them for twenty-two years, and seeing that there was a probability of a change of administration'-to put it in no stronger light-they have hedged, and they have taken good care of themselves; they have passed a civil-service bill and Democrats have helped them to enact it; and we have it on the statute-book now that there is no Democrat to be put into office in any of the executive departments except in the lowest positions. Above them the Republicans alone may compete with each other for the places; but there is no chance for a Democrat.'

"In a free republican government like this those who belong to both parties fight for office as well as principle. Do you believe that the Democratic leaders in all the different States would work with the same energy, and zeal, and ability as they would if you held out to them a chance of a change of the offices, with the change of the Executive? It would be contrary to all the history of the past to expect any such work.

"I know it has been replied to this that the Democratic candidate would not likely have so strong opposition from the Republican officeholders in office. I have no faith in that. The Republican office-holders are usually ardent, true Republicans; they believe in the principles and practices of their party, and they want to promote and perpetuate them, and they believe that that party has a sort of divine right to the offices of this Government, and they will be as true to their party in the campaign

as the needle is to the pole, while you deaden the energies of the Democratic leaders from the lowest to the highest by taking away any inducements you would otherwise hold out to them to fight with the view of reaping any of the rewards of success. They would vote the ticket patriotically as true Democrats, but they would not exert themselves as they would do if they believed there would be a general change, or even a change of one half the persons holding the offices.

"I say, then, take it any way you will, I do not see, with great deference to my friend from Ohio, why at this time a Democrat should vote for this bill; certainly not without important amendments, that destroy the aristocracy of Republican office-holding that this bill provides for. Will Democrats vote for it when it closes the doors of the competitive examination against Democrats for every position except the very lowest? I do not wonder that our Republican friends are very unanimous, and very anxious at this time for the passage of this bill. The only wonder I have is that it has taken them so long to reach this point. The first four years when they were in power were years of war. It was then no time to discuss civil service.

"Perhaps the next two or three years ought not be counted, during the stormier period of reconstruction; but take off six years from twenty-two and it leaves about sixteen years of peace, when Senators and Representatives were in condition here to consider the best interests of the whole country. It has taken them sixteen years to reach the point of, as they consider, a real civil-service reform. Well, now, to show the humbuggery in this whole affair, there was a very good civil-service statute put upon the book some years ago when Gen. Grant was President, and the law was not only enacted but the machinery was provided. The three commissioners-I believe three was the number-were appointed. As is contemplated by the act, they went to work; civil-service reform, it was said, was going to be given to the country then. Broad plenary powers were given to the President. There were some very patriotic and able gentlemen, too, on the commission. One of them was from my own State, Judge D. A. Walker, an honored name, a worthy gentleman, a true Republican. They worked and did, no doubt, the best they knew how; and what real substantial reform did the country see? It became so much of a mockery that Congress in a few years afterward refused to appropriate the salaries of the commissioners. It was seen to be a deception and a fraud in practice, whatever might have been intended and however sincere President Grant might have been in his purpose to carry it out in good faith. It failed. It was an inglorious failure; and matters went on as matters will go on in this Government.

"This is a republican government; it is

democratic in form, and you have to change the nature of the government and change human nature also before you will be able to adopt in practice here any Utopian theories about civil service.

"I do not laud the sentiment mentioned by the honorable Senator from Massachusetts, which he attributes to Mr. Marcy, that 'to the victors belong the spoils.' He said it was rather coarse. Probably it was; but yet to a very great extent it has been the system practiced from the first day of the inauguration of this Government: and whatever you may put upon the statute-book it will be the system practiced until its funeral-knell is sounded. And no party in this Government ever practiced the spoils system with more zeal and energy than the Republican party has. 'To the victors belong the spoils' has been its constant motto in practice; and still would be, if impending defeat did not stare it in the face. There may be some reforms, some of the worst features may be cut off; but in the main the Executive who comes into power when his party has long been deprived of power will find a way, and the heads of departments under him will find a way to give to his followers the benefit of the offices or a large proportion of them.

"I say the argument is legitimate, that, give the measure all you claim for it, then as Democrats you should not vote to handicap your candidate, and you should not vote to retain in office for life those who have held the positions for so long a time, and who are your political enemies. But if it is not true that it will be executed or that it amounts to anything, then this is a vain business in which we are engaged, and we had better spend our time in something that is of some practical utility.

"The preamble of this bill promises very finely. I desire to read it:

practicable, all citizens duly qualified shall be allowed "Whereas, common justice requires that, so far as equal opportunities, on grounds of personal fitness, for securing appointments, employment, and promotion, in the subordinate civil service of the United

States.

"That is very broad. It would seem to be a very good doctrine. But I confess I was struck when I looked further over and saw that in the very teeth of that recital of the proper principle the competitive examinations are limited to the lowest grade of offices. That means, I suppose, that it is justice in case of the lowest grade to give everybody a chance; but above that the benefit must be confined to the inner circle, those who have held office a long time and want to continue to hold it; in other words, to Republicans.

"Again, the preamble says:

"Whereas, justice to the public likewise requires that the Government shall have the largest choice among those likely to answer the requirements of the public service.

"That is good doctrine, but the body of the

act is in the teeth of it. The Government should have the largest choice among those likely to answer the requirements as to qualifications for office, and yet you limit the choice of the Government in the body of the bill to the lowest grade.

"Again:

"Whereas, justice, as well as economy, efficiency, and integrity in the public service, will be promoted by substituting open and uniform competitive examinations for the examinations heretofore held in pursuance of the statutes of 1853 and 1855.

Economy, efficiency, and the integrity of the service will be promoted. says the preamble, by substituting competitive examinations, and yet the body of the bill denies the competitive examination, so far as the public generally are concerned, to all persons except for the lowest grade of offices. But reference has been made here to the letter and doctrines of Mr. Jefferson on this question. He has been cited as authority, and he is very high authority on any subject that he ever handled. There are certain expressions in his letter to Mr. Lincoln that are warped to mean that removals should take place for cause only, and that qualifications and fitness alone should be looked to. Mr. Jefferson made very important qualifications of that doctrine in that letter. I propose to read a portion of it. He speaks of the action of the leaders of the Federal party at that time, and says (see his letter to Levi Lincoln, dated 25th of October, 1802, vol. iv, Jefferson's Works, page 450):

They are trying slanders now which nothing could prompt but a gull which blinds their judgments as well as their consciences. I shall take no other revenge than by a steady pursuit of economy and peace, and by the establishment of republican principles in substance and in form, to sink Federalism into an abyss from which there shall be no resurrection for it. I still think our original idea as to office is best; that is, depend for the obtaining a just participation on deaths, resignations, and delinquencies.

"But Mr. Jefferson says more than that: "This will least affect the tranquillity of the people and prevent their giving in to the suggestion of our enemies, that ours has been a contest for office, not for principle. This is rather a slow operation-[and if he had been confined to the lowest grade of office alone he would have thought it a great deal slower] -but it is sure if we pursue it steadily, which, how ever, has not been done with the undeviating resolution I could have wished.

"Mr. Jefferson only waited for deaths, resignations, and delinquencies. When these came, a Republican, as the Democrats were then called, was to be put into office. He declares that was very slow. And what does this bill do? It waits in the same manner for deaths, resignations, or delinquencies, but only in the lower grades. It does not give us the chance of putting in a Democrat in every grade that becomes vacant, because the competitive examination must be from those in office at the time; for all above the lowest grade. It confines us to the lowest grade. What would Mr. Jefferson have said if there had been an

"To these means of obtaining a just share in the transaction of the public business shall be added one other, to wit, removal for electioneering activity.

"What would he have said to the hundreds of clerks who are given time when elections come on to go to Ohio, and the extreme limits, wherever there is a Republican State, to take an active part in controlling the State elections? Would he not have swept the last one of them from office? He adds 'Or open and industrious opposition to the principles of the present Government, legislative and executive.'

"If they took an active part in politics against him, or if they were open in opposition to the principles of the party in power administering the Government, they were to go by the board. Hear him again:

"Every officer of the Government may vote at elections according to his conscience; but we should betray the cause committed to our care were we to permit the influence of official patronage to be used to overthrow that cause. enable you to judge of prominent offenders in your Your present situation will State, in the case of the present election.

is, those who had taken a prominent part "Prominent offenders in your State.' That what he meant, and it would be left to Mr. Linagainst his party in Connecticut. That was coln to judge of those who had been prominent in that way. Then he adds, 'I pray you to seek them, to mark them, to be quite sure of your ground, that we may commit no error or wrong, and leave the rest to me.'

"He was President and said: 'Seek them; mark them; be quite sure of your ground, and then leave the rest' to him; he would take care of it. Again he says:

"I have been urged to remove Mr. Whittemore, the surveyor of Gloucester, on grounds of neglect of duty and industrious opposition. Yet no facts are so distinctly charged as to make the step sure which we should take in this. Will you take the trouble to satisfy yourself on this point? I think it not amiss that it should be known that we are determined to remove officers who are active or open-mouthed against the Government, by which I mean the Legislature as well as the Executive.

"Mark his language. He thought it not amiss that it should be known that they were determined to remove from office those who had been active and open-mouthed against the Government whether in the legislative or the executive department. That was the sort of civil service that Mr. Jefferson advocated; that was the advice he gave to his friend Lincoln, of Connecticut; and mind you, he says, Mark them, and leave the rest to me.' And so it will be, no matter what civil-service bill you may pass; whenever the President and the heads of departments desire to do so, they will mark them, and they will find a way of getting rid of them.