Repiiblicanism vs. Graiitism. THE FRESIDEXCY A TRUST; NOT A PLAYTHING AND PERQUISITE. Personal Government cand Presidential Pretensions. REFORM AND PURITY IN GOVERNMENT. SPEECH OF HON. CHARLES SUMNER, OF ]S1A.SSA.CE[XJSETTS, DELIVEKED IN THE SENATE OF THE UiS'ITED STATES, MAT 31, 1872. " Fofrntes. Thon whom do you call the good ? Al rib in (Us.. I uiean by the good iliose who are able to rule in the city. Soo-ntetf. Not, sural j'. over horses? AlcUiiddex. Certiinly not. So'-i-ntoN. But (ivcr men ? Alcibiades. Yes.'' {Plato, Dialogues. Tlie First Alcibiades. " Amoner the foremost purnoses ou!?ht to be the diwifill of this odious, insultin?. dsgradinor. aide-de- campi.-^h, incnr)nbln dictatorship. At such .i crisis is tlio oountrv to bo, left, at the 'neroy of b irr.iek cc iuci is and mes<-rooin politic.-?'' — Letter of Lord D.cr-luiinto Ileiirij Broughain, Aug., IS'SJ. Brougkaiii'a Life and Timea^Yol. iii, p. 44. WASHINGTON: F. & J. RfVES & GEO. A. BATLEY, REPORTERS AND PRINflEllS OF r;iE D33ATEi OJ? CONGRESS 1872. Avery Architectural and Fine Arts Library Gift of Seymour B. Durst Old York Library "It ia a maxim in politics which -we rendily admit as tindi?ptited and universal, that a power, however great, when gr;inted by law to an eminent matristrate, i.« not so dnnfferou> to liberty as an nuthority, how- ever inconsider:ible. which he acquires frum violence and usurpation."— Z/ame'* Eauaya, Fart 11, No. 10, of $ome remarkable vustuina. Digitized by tine Internet Arcliive in 2013 http://archive.org/details/republicanismvsgOOsunnn_0 SPEECH. The sundry civil appropriation bill coming up as unfini.shiHl business. Mr. Scmner moved to postpone inaetiuitely its consideration, and after remarking on the report of the Committee on the Sale of Arms to French agents, proceeded: Mr. President: I have no hpsitation in declaring myself a member of the Republican party and one of the straitest of the sect. I doubt ifany Snnator can pointto earlier or more constant service in its behalf. I began at the beginning, and from tliat early day have never failed to sustain its candidates and to advance i its principles. For these 1 have labored J always by speech and vote, in the Senate and elsewhere, at first with few only, but at last as success began to dawn then wiih mul- titudes flocking lorward. In this cause I never asked who were my associates or how many they would number. In the conscious- ness of right 1 was willing to be alone. To I such a party, with which so much of my life is intertwined, I have no common attachment. Not witliout regret can 1 see it sutfer; not ; without a pang can I see it changed from its I origii.ci character, for such a change is death, i Therefore do I ask, with no common feeling, that the peril which menaces it may pass away. I stood by its cradle; let me not follow its hearse. ORIGIN' AXD OBJECT OP THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. Turning back to its birth, I recall a speech of my own at a State convention in Massa- chusetts, as early as September 7, 1854, where I vindicated its principles and announced its name in these words: ''As Uepublicaxs we go forth to eticonnter the Oligarchs of Slavery. The report records the applause wiih which this name was received by the excited multitude. Years of conflict ensued, in which the good cause constantly gained, j At last, in the summer of 1860, Alirahatn Lincoln was nominated by this party as its candidate for the Presidency ; and here par- don me if 1 refer again to myself. On my way home from the Senate I was detained in Nevr York by the invitation of party friends to speak at tl)e Coo[)er Institute on the issues of the pending election. The speech was made July 12, and, I believe, was the earliest of the campaign. As published at the time it was entitled ''Origin, Necessity, and Perma- nence of the Republican Party." and to ex- hibit these was its precise object. Both the necessity and permanence of ihe party were asserted. A briel' pass ige. which 1 take from the report in the New York Herald, will show the duty and destiny I ventured then to hold up. Alter dwelling on the evils of vSlavery and the corruptions it had engetidered, including the purchase of votes at the polls, I proceeded as follows : '* Therefore just so long as the present false theories of Slavery prevail , whether ooncerniug its ch aracter morally, economic:iliy, aii'l socially, or concerning its prerogatives under the Coiistirution. just so hjo? as the Slave Oiii^arehy. whicii is the sleepless and unhesitating agent ot Slavery in all its pretensions, coininuesio exist as a political power, the Repub- lican party must endure. [ Applau^*^.] Il b.id men con- spire for Slavery, g iod men must ombiiie fur Free- dom. ["Good, good !'] N-r cm the holy war l)e ended until the barbarism now dominant in the Republic is overthrown and the P.ig in |)ower is driven irom our Jerusalem. [Applaus-^.] And when the trium{>h is won, securing the immediate obiect of our organ- ization, the RepubliCiin parry wiit not die, but puri- fied by long contest with Slavery and filled with higher lite, it will be lilted to yet other etf )rts with nobler aims for the good of man. [Applause, three cheers for Lincoln.]" Such, on the eve of the presidential election, was my description of the Republican party and my aspiration for its fu"ure. It was not to die, but purified by lon^ contest with Slavery and filled with higher life, we were to behold it lifted to yet other elF»rts with nobler aims for the good o man. Here was nothing personal, nothing m -an or p^'ty. Tiie Republican party was nece^3ary and perma- nent, and always on an asoeuding pUme. For such a party there was no deatn, but higher life and nobler aims; and this was the party to which I give my vows. But alas! hovr 6 cbiiiiged. Once country was the object, and not li man ; once princi()le was inscribed on the viciorious banners, and not a name only. REPUBLICAN PARTY SEIZED BY THE PRESIDENT. It is not difficult to indicate wlien this disas- trous clian^e, exuliitii; the will of one man above all else, became not merely manifest but painluliy conspicuous. Alreague I select two typical iustauces, Nepotism and Gitt-takiug officially compensated, eacli absolutely inde- fensible in the head of a Republic, most per- nicious in example, and showing beyond ques- tion that surpassing egotism which changed the presidential office into a personal insiru- mentaiiiy, not unlike the trunk of an elephant, apt for all things, small as well as great, from provision for a relation to forcing a treaty on a reluctant Senate or forcing a reelection on a reluctant people. NEPOTISM OF THE PRESIDENT. Between these two typical instances I hesi- tate which to place fjremost, but since the nepotism of the l^resident is a ruling passion revealing the primary instincts of his nature ; since it is maintanied by him in utter uncon- sciousness of its oflfensive character ; since instead of blushing for it as an unhappy mis- take he continues to uphold it ; since it has been openly defended by Senators on this floor, and since no true patriot anxious for republican institutions can doubt that it ought to be driven with hissing and scorn from all possibility of repetition, I begin with this undoubted abuse. There has been no call of Congress for a return of the relations holding office, stipend or money-making opportunity under the Pres- ident. The country is left to the press for in- formation on this important subject. If there is any exaggeration the President is in fault, since knowing the discreditable allegations he has not hastened to furnish the precise facts, or at least his partisans have failed in not call- ing for the official information. In the mood which they have showti in tins Chamber it is evident that any resolution calling for it moved by a Senator not known to be tor his reelec- tion would meet wi(h opposiiion, and an effort to vindicate republican institutions would be denounced as an assault on the President. But the newspapers have placed enough beyond question tor judgment on this extraordinary case, althougti thus far there has been no attempt to appreciate it, especially in th3 light of history. One list makes the number of beneficia- ries as many as forty-two — being probably every known person allied to the President by blood or marriage. Persons seeming to speak for the President, or at least after careful ia« quirie?:, have denied the accuracy of this list, reducing it to thirteen. It will not be ques- tioned that there is at least a baker's dozen ia this category — thirteen relations of the Presi- dent billeted on the country, not one of whona but for this relationship would have been brought forward, the whole con'siituting a case of nepotism not utiworthy of those worst gov- erntnents where office is a family possession. Beyond the list of thirteen are other revela- tions, showing that this strange abuse did not stop with the President's relations, but that these obtained appointtnents for others ia their circle, so that every relai ion became a cen- ter of influence, while the presidential family extended indefinitely. Only one President has appointed relations, and that was John Adams; but he found pub- lic opinion, inspired by the example of Washington, so strong Jigainst it that after a slight experiment he replied to an applicant, You know it is impossible for me to appoint my own relations to anything without drawing forth a torrent of obloquy." (Letter to Ben- jamin Adams, April 2, 1799; John Adams's Works, vol. VIII, p. G34.) The judgment of the country found voice in Thomas Jefferson, who. in a leiter written shortly after he became President, used tliese strong words: "Mr. Adams degraded Jdmself infinitely by his con- duct on this subject." But John Adams, besides transferring his son, John Quincy Adams, from one diplomatic post to another, appointed only two relations. Pray, sir, what words would Jefferson use if he were here to speak on the open and multifarious nepotism of our President? ORIGIN AND HISTORY OF NEPOTISM. The presidential pretension is so important in every aspect, and the character of repub- lican institutions is so absolutely compromised by its toleration, that it cannot be treated in any perfunctory way. It shall not be my fault if hereafter there is any doubt with regard to it. The word "nepotism" is of Italian origin. First appearing at Rome when the papal power was at its height, it served to designate the authority and influence exercised by the nephews, or more generally the family of a Pope. All the family of a Pope were nephews and the Pope was universal uncle. As far back as 10(37 this undoubted abuse occupied attention to such a degree that it became the subject of an able historical work in two vol- umes, entitled // Xipotismo di Roma, which is full of instruction and warning even for our Uepublic. From Italian the word j)assed into other Europdti hmguages, but in the lapse ot lime or process of naturalization, it has come to denote the misconduct of the appointing power. Addison, who visited 11 Rome at the beginning of the last century. descril)e'i it as ''undue patronajie bestowed by the Popps upon the rnembers of their fam- ily." Bur. the word has ampiitied since, so as to embrace others besides Ptjjies who appoint relations to office. Johnson in his D ciiotiarv dt-fiued it simply as "fondness for nephews;"' but our latesi and best iexicogrnpher, Wor- cester, supplies a definition more complete and satisfactory: '' Favoritism shown to rela- tions; patronaue bestowed in consideration of family relationship and vot of merit."' Such undoubtedly is the meaning of the word as now received and emfjloy^'d. The character of this pretension appears in its oriiriri and history. In the early days of the ('hurch. Po|)es are described as discarding all reLtionship, whether of blood or alliance, and inclining to merit alone in their appoint meijts. alihougli there were some with so large a number of nepliews. jjratid neidiews. brothers- in-law, and relations as to baffle belief, and yet it is reconied that no sooner did the good Pope enter the Va'icat), whicli is the Execmive Man- sion of Ptome, than lelations fled, brothers-in- law hid themselves, grand-nephews removed away, and net)hews got at a long distance. Such was the early virtue. Nepotism did not exist, and the woid itself was unknown. At last, in 1471, twenty-one years before the discovery of America by Christopher Columi)us, Sixtus IV became Pope, and with hiiu began that nepotism which soon became famousasa Koman institution. Born in 1411, the son of a fisherman, tlie eminent, founder was already titty-seven years old, and he reigned thirteen years, bringing lo his functions large expt-rieiice as a successful preacher and as general of the Franciscan friars. Though cra'iledin poverty, and by ihe vows of his order b(miid to mendicancy, he began at once to heap otlice and nches upon the various members of his fa;uily, so that his conduct, frotn its bare faced inconsistency with the obiigation of his liie, excited, accoidmgto the litsiorian, *' the amrizement and wonder of all." The uselul reforms he attempted are forgotten, and this reuiarliable pontitf is chiefly remembert-d now as the earliest nepotist. D.ffereiii degrees of severity are employed by di&Vrent autliors in charncierizing this unhappy fame. Bouillet, in his Dictionary of History, having Catholic approb'^tton. describes him as feeble toward his nephews," and our own Cyclopaedia, in a brief exposition of iiis character, says lie made hitnself odious by excessive nepotism." But in all varieties of expression the ofleuse Btands out for judgment. The immediate success'^r of Sixtus was Innocent VI ll, whom the historian describes as "very cold to his relations," since two only obtained pre'erment at liis hands. But the example of the founder so far prevailed that for a century nepotism, as was said. " lorded it in Rome," except in a few instances wonhy of commemoration and example. Of these exceptions, the Hrst in time was Julius If, founder of St. Peter's at Rome, whose remarkable countenance is so beau- tifully preserved by the genius of Raffaelle. Though the nephew of the nepotist, and not declining to a[)point all relations, he did it with such moderation that nepotism was said to be dying out. Adrian VI, early teacher of Charles V, and successor of Leo X. set a better example by refusing absolutely. But so accustomed had Rome become to this abuse, that not only the embassadors but the people condemned him as "too severe wiih his rela- tions." A S(m of his cousin, studying in Siena, started fir Rome, trustinj; to obtain important recognition. But the Pope, with- out sef-ing him, sent him back on a hired horse. Relations thronged from other places and even from across the Alps, longing for that great- ness which other Popes had lavished on family ; but Adrian dismissed t hem with a si ij^ lit change of clothing and an allowance of money for the journey. One who from poverty came on foot was permitted to return on foot. This Pof>e carried abnegation of his family so far as to mj.ke relationship an excuse for not re- warding one who had served the Church well. Similar in characer was Marcellus II, who became Pope in looo. He was unwilling that any of his family should come to Rome; even his broiher w^s forbidden ; but this good example was closed by deaih after a reign of twenty days only. And yet this brief period of exemplary virtue has made this pontiff famous. Kindred in spirit whs Uiban VI t, who reigned thirteen days only in 1590, but long enough to rep^-l his relations, and also Leo XI, who reigned iwenty-flve days in IGUo. To this list may be added Innocent IX, who died after two months of service. It is related that his death displeased his relations much, and dissolved the air-castles they had built. They had hurried from Bo ogna, but except a grand nephew, all were obliged to return poor as ihev came. In this list I must not forget Pius V, who re'gned from lobo to 1572. He set h.iinself so completely against aggrandizing his own family, that he was with ditii -uby per- suaded to make a sister's son cardinal, and would not have done it hid not ail the car- dmals united on grounds of conscience against ihe denial of this dignity to one most worthy of it. Such virtue was part ot that elevated character which caused his subsequent canon- ization. These good Popes were short-lived. The reigns of all except Pius counted by days only;' but they opened happy glimpses of an administration where the powers of govern- ment were not treated as a personal peiquisiie. The opposite list had the advantage of time. Conspicuous among nepotists was Alex- 12 ander VI, whose family name of Borgia is damned to fame. With hira iiepotism as- sumed its most brutal and barbarous develop- ment, reflecting (he character of its pontifical author, wlio was witliout the smallest ray of good. Other Popes were less cruel and bloody, but i!Ot less determined in providing for their families. Paul liJ, who was of the great house of Farnese, would have had the Estates of the Church a garden for the " liliws" which flourish on the escutcheon of his family. It is related that when Urban VUI, who was a Barberini, commenced his historic reign, all his relations at a distance flew to Home like the "bees" on the f.imily arms, to suck the honey of the Church, but not leaving behind the sting with which they pricked while they sucked. Whether lilies or bees it was the 5ame. The latter pontiff gave to nepotism fullness of power when he resolved "to have no business with any one not dependent upon his house." In the same spirit he excused himself from making a man cardinal because he had been " the enemy of his nephews." Although nothing so positive is recorded of Paul V, who was a Borghese, his nepotism appears in the Roman saying, that while serv- ing the Church as a good shepherd he "gave too much wool to his relations." These instructive incidents, illusiraiing the pon- tifical pretension, reflect light on the history of palaces and galleries at Rome, now admired by the visitor from distant lands. If not cre- ated, they were at least enlarged by nepotism. It does not always appear how many rela- tions a Pope endowed. Otten it was all, as in the case of Gregory XIII, who, besides advancing a nephew actually at Rome, calleci thither all his nephews and grand-nephews, whether from brothers or sisters, and gave them offices, dignities, governments, lord ships, and abbacies. Cassar Borgia and his sister Lucrezia were not the only rela- tions of Alexander VI. I do not find the number adopted by Sixtus, the founder of the system. Pius iV, wlio was of the grasping Medicean family, favored no less than twenty- five. Alexander VII, of the Chigi family, had about him five nephews and one brother, ■which a contemporary characterized as " ne- potism all complete." This pontiff began his leign by forbidding his relations to appear at Rome, which redounded at once to his credit throughout the Christian world, while the astonished people discoursed of his holiness and the purity of his life, expecting even to see miracies. In making the change he yielded evidently to immoral pressure and the example of predecessors. The performances of papal nephews figure in history. Next after the Borgias, were the Caraffas, who obtained power through Paul IV, but at last becoming too insolent and rapacious, their uucle was compelled to strip them of their dignities and drive them from Rome. Somet nes nephews were employed chiefly in ministering to pontifical pleasures, as iti the case of Julias III, who, according to the historian, "thought of tiothing but ban- queting with that one and with this one, keep- ing his relations in Rome, rather to accom- pany him at banquets than to aid him in the government of the holy Church, of which he thought little." This occasion for relations does not exist at Rome now, as the pontiff leads a discreet li'e, always at home and never ban- quets abroad. These historic instances make us see nepo- tism in its original seat. Would you know how it was regarded there? Sometimes it was called ahydra wiih many heads, sprouting anew at the election of a pontiff; then again it was called Ottoman rather than Christian in char- acter. The contemporary historian who has described it so minutely says that those who merely read of it without seeing it will find it difficult to believe or even imagine. The qualities of a Pope's relation were said to be "ignorance and cunning." It is easy to be- lieve that this prostitution of the head of the Church was one of the abuses which excited the cry for Reform, and awakened even ia Rome the echoes of Martin Luther. A brave Swiss is recorded as declaring himself unwill- ing to be the subject of a pontiff who was himself the subject of his own relations. But even this pretension was not without open defenders, while the general effrontery with which it was maintained assumed that it was above question. If some gave with eyes closed, most gave with eyes open. It was said that Popes were not to neglect their own blood, that they should not show themselves worse than the beasts, not one of whom failed to caress his relations, and the case of bears and lions, the most ferocious of all, was cited as authority for this recognition of one's own blood. All this was soberly said, and it is doubtless true. Not even a Pope can justly neglect his own blood; but help and charity- must be at his own expense and not at the expense of his country. In appointments to office merit and not blood is the only just recommendation. That nepotism has ceased to lord itself ia Rome; that no pontiff billets his relations upon the Church; tliat the appointing power of the Pope is treated as a public trust and not as a personal perquisite — all this is the present testimony with regard to that govern- ment which knows from experience the bane- ful character of this abuse. AilEUlCAN AUTHORITIES OX NEPOTISM. The nepotism of Rome was little known in our country, and I do not doubt that Wash- ington, when declining to make the presiden- tial office a persoual perquisite, was governed 13 by that instinct of duty and patriotism which rendered hini so preeminent. Through all the perils of a seven years' war, he had battled with that kingly rule which elevates a whole family without regard to merit, fastening all upon the nation, and he had learned that this royal system could find no place in a republic. Therefore he rejected the claims of relations, and in nothing was his example more beauti- ful. His latest biographer, Washington Irving, records him as saying: " So far as I know ray own mind, I would notbein the remotest decree influenced in making nomina- tions bv motives arising from the ties of family or blood."— Xi/e of Waahington, Vol. V, p. 22. Then again he declared his purpose, " To discharge the duties of oflBce with that im- partiality and zeal for the public good which ought never to suffer connections of blood or friendship to mingle so as to have the least sway on decisions of a public nature." This excellent rule of conduct is illustrated by the advice to his successor with regard to the transfer of his son, John Quincy Adams. After giving it as his decided opin- ion that the latter was the most valuable char- acter we had abroad, and promising to be the ablest of all our diplomatic corps, Washing- ton declares : "If he waa now to be brought into that line, or into any other public walk, I could not. upon the principle which has regulated my own conduct, disapprove of the caution which is hinted at in the Utter."— John Adam>f'8 Works, Vol. VIII. p. 530. Considering the im[)Ortance of the rule it were better for the country if it had prevailed over parental regard and the extraordinary merits of the son. In vindicating his conduct at a later day John Adams protested against what he called "the hypersuperlaiive virtue" of Washing- ton, and insisted: "A President ought not to appoint a man be- c.Tuse he is his relation ; nor ought he to refuse or neglect to appoint him for that reason." "With absolute certainty that the President is above all prejudice of family and sensitive to merit only, tliis rule is not unreasonable ; but who cati be trusted to apply it? JeSerson devtloped and explained the true principles in a manner worthy of republican institutions. In a letter to a relation immedi- ately after becoming President, he wrote: " The public will never be made to believe that an appoiutuiL'nt of a relation is made on the ground of merit alone, uninfluenced by family views, iior can they ever xee. with approbation officer, the di>tposal ofiohich they intrust to their Presideuta for public pur- poxea, divided out o« fainily property. Mr. Adams degraded himself infinkely by his conduct on this subject, as Washington had done himself the great- est honor. With two such examples to proceed by, I shriuld be doubly inexcusable to ere."— Letter to (jeorg<; Jefferxon^ Marvh 27, 18Ul; Jefferson's Works, Vol. IV, p. 388. After his retirement from the Presidency, in a letter to a kinsman, he asserts the rule again : *' Toward acquiring the confidenee of the people. the very first measure is to satisfy thcra of bis dis- interestedness, and that he is directing their aS"iirs with a single eye to their good, and not to build up fortunes tor himself and family, and esrie- cially that the officers appuinted to transact their business, are appointed because they are the fittest men, not because they are his relations. So prone are they to susF>icion, thai where a Prerider.t ap- points a relation of his own. however worthy, they will believe that favor, and not merit, was the motive. I therefore laid it down as a law of con- duct for myself. nev<>rtogive an appointment to a relation."— /^e^/f^r to J. (Jarland Jefferuon, J dnunry 25, 1810; Ibid., Vol. V. p. 498. That statement is unanswerable. The elect of the people must live so as best to maintain their interests and to elevate the national sen timent. This can be only by an example of unselfish devotion to the public weal which shall be above suspicion. A President sus- pected of weakness for his relations is already shorn of strength. In saying that his predecessor "degraded himself infinitely by his conduct on this sub- ject," Jefferson shows the rigor of his require- ment. Besides the transfer of his son, John Quincy Adams, from one diplomatic mission to another, John Adams is responsible for the appointment of his son-in law, Colonel Smith, as surveyor of the port of New York, and his wife's nephew, William Cranch. as chief justice of thecircuitcourtof the Disti ictof Columbia— both persons of merit, and the former serving through the war wit h high applause of his supe- riors." The public sentiment appears in the condemnation of" these appointments. In re- fusing another of his relations, we have already seen that John Adams wrote: ''You know it is impossible for me to appoint my own rela- tions to anything without drawing forth a tor- rent of obloquy." Bat this torrent was nothing but the judgment of the American people unwilling that republican institutions at that early day should suffer. Thus far Jolin Adams stands alone. If any other Piesldent has made appointments from his own family, it has been on so petty a scale as not to be recognized in history. John Quiticy Adams, when President, did not follow his father. An early letter to his mother fore- shadows a rule not unlike that of Jefferson: " I hope, my ever dear and honored mother, that you are fully convinced from my letters, which yi>u have before this received, that upon the contingency of my father's being placed in the first magistracy, I shall never give him any trouble by solicitation for office of any kind. Your late letters have re- peated so many times that I shall in that case have nothing to expect, that I am afraid you have im- agined it possible that / mioht form exi>ectat ions from such an event. I had hoped that my mother knew me better: that she did me the justice to believe that I have not been so totally regardless or forget- ful of the principles which ray education li.ol in- stilled, nor so torally destitute of a />er«ona^ sense of delicacy as to be susceptibleof a wish tendme in that dirociion." — ./o/ut Adams'a Worku, Vol. VIII, pp. 529, 530, note. To Jefferson's sense of public duty John Quincy Adams added the sense of personal 14 delicacy, boih strong, against such appoint- ment. To the irresistible judgment against tliis abuse, a recent moralist, of hjfty nature, Theodore Parker, imparts new expression when he sav><, '* It is a dangerous and unjust practice.'' [Jlistoric Americans, p. 211.) This is simple and moniiory. PRESIDENTIAL APOLOGIES FOR NEPOTISM. Without the avalanche of testimony against this presidential pretension it is only necessary to glance at, the defenses sometimes set up; for sucli isthe insensibility bred hy presidemial example, that even this intolerable outrage is not without voices, speaking for the Presi- dent. Sometimes it is said that, his salary being far from royal, the people will not scan closely an attem|)t to help relntions. which, being interpreted, means that the President may supplement the pettiness of his salary by the appointing power. Let John Adams, who did not hesitate to bestow ottice upon a few relations of unquestioned merit, judge this pretension. I quote his words: '* Every public man should be honestly paid for his services. Uut he should be restrained from every jierquixite not known to the laws, and he should make no claims uijon the grratirude ot the public, nor ever conler an office within his patron- age upon a son, a brother, a Iriend, upon pretense that he is not paid for his services by the profits of bis office."— A^<^er to John Jebb, August 21, 1785; Wurk-^, Vol. IX. p. 535. It is impossible to deny the soundness of this requirement and its completeness as an answer to one of the apologies. Sometimes the defender is more audacious, insisting openly upon the presidential preroga- tive without question, until we seem to hear in ag'^ravated f()rm the obnoxious cry, "To the victor belong the spoils." 1 did not suppose that this old cry could he revived in any form ; but since it is heard again, I choose to expose it, and here I use the language of Madison, whose mi d wisdom has illumined so much of constitutional duty. In his judgment the pretension was odious, "that offices and emoluments were the spoils of victory . ^Ae per- sonal property of the successful candidate tor the Presidency, " and he adds in words not to be forgotten at this moment: **The principle if avowed without the practice, or practiced without the avow.il, could not fail to degrade any Administration — both together com- pletely so."—Lener to Bilionrd Coh, August 29, 1834. Letters and Writings, Vol. IV, p. 356. This is strong language. The rule in its early form could not fail to degrade any Admitiistration. But now this degrading rule is extended, and we are told that to the President's family belong the spoils. Anoiher apology, vouchsafed even on this floor, is, that if the President c:umot appoint his relations they alone of all citizens are excluded from office, wliich, it is said, should not be. But is it not for the public good that tbej should be excluded? Such was the wise judgment of Jefferson, and such is the tegti- mony from another quarter. That emineni pre- late, Bishop Butler, who lias given to English literature one of its most masterly productions, known as " Butler's Analogy," after his ele- vation to the see of Durham with its remark- able patronaire, was so self denying with regard to his family that a nephew said to him, " Methinks, my lord, it is a misfortune to be related to you." Golden words of honor for the English bishop ! Bur none such have beea earned by the American President. Assuming that in case of positive merit desig- nating a citizen for a particular post th^ Presi- dent might a[ipoint a relation, it would be only where i he merit was so shining that his absence would be noticed. At least it must be such as to make the citizen a candidate wiihouc regard to family. But no such merit is attrib- uted to the beneficiaries of our President, some of whom have done liiile but bring scandal U()On I he public service. At least one is tainted with iVaud, and another, with ihe commission of the Uepublic abroad, has been guilty ol indis- cretions incon^istent with his trust. i.\ppointed oriuinally in open defiance of republican prin- ciples, they have been retained in office after their unfitness became painfully manifest. By the testimony before a congressional commit- tee, one of these, a brother-in-law, was impli- cated in bribery and corruption. It is said that at last, after considerable delav, the Presi- dent has consented to his removal. Here 1 leave for the present this enormous unrepubiican pretension, waiting to hear if it can again find an apologist. Is there a single Senator who will not dismiss it to judgment? GIFT-TAKING OFFICIALLY COMPENSATED. From one typical abuse I pass to another. From a dropsical nepotism swollen to ele- phantiasis, which nobody can defend, I pass to gift-taking, which with our Pres dent has assumed an unprecedented form. Sometimes public men even in our country have taken jiifts, but it is not known tliat any President before has repaid the patron with office. For a public man to take gifts is repreliensil)le ; for a President to select Cabinet c mncilors and other officers among those from whom he has taken gilts is an anomaly in republican annals. Observe, sir, that I sj)eak of it geutly, unwilling to exhibit the indignation whicn such a presidential pretension is calculated to arouse. The country will judge it, and blot it out as an example. There have been througUout history corrupt characters in official staiioti, but, wheiher in ancient or modern limes, the testimony is con- stant against the taking of gifts, and nowhere with more force than in our Scriptures, where it is said, " Thou shalt not wresr, judgment, thou shalt not respect persons, neither talce a gift', fur a gift doth blind the eyes of the 15 wise." (Deuteronomy, XVI, 19.) Here is the inhibition and also the reason, which slight observation shows to be true. Does not a gift blind the eyes of the wise? The influence of gifis is represented by Plutarch in the life of a Spartan king: *' For he thought those ways of intrapping men by gifts and presents, which other kings use, dishonest and inartiflcial ; and it seemed lo him to be the most noble method and moft suitable to a king to win the affections of those that came near him by personal intercourse and agreeable conversation, eince between a friend and a mercenary the only distinction is, that we gain the one by our char- acter and conversation and the other by our money."— Platarch'a Lives; Clouoh' a Edition Vol. IV, p. 479. What is done under the influence of gift is mercenary ; but whether from ruler to subject or from subject to ruler, the gift is equally per- nicious. An ancient patriot feared "the Greeks bearing gifis," and these words have become a proverb, but there are Greeks bearin;? gilts elsewhere than at Troy. A public man can traffic with such only at his peril. At their appearance the prayer should be said, ''Lead us not into temptation." The best examples testify. Thus in the auto- biography of Lord Brougham, posthumously published, it appears that at a great meeting in Glasgow £500 were subscribed as a gift to him for his public service, to be put in such form as he might think best. He hesitated. "It required,'.' he records, " much considera- tion, as such gifts were liable to abuse." Not I content with his own judgment, he assembled ! his friends to discuss it, "Lord Holland. | Lord Erskine, Romiliy and Baring," and he wrote Earl Grey, afterward Prime Minister, who replied : Both Granville and I accepted a piece of plate from the Catholics in Glas- gow, of no great value indeed, after we icere turned out. If you still feel scruples, I can | only add that it is impossible to err on the | side of delicacy with respect to matters of | this nature." It ended iu his accepting a small gold inkstand. In our country Washington keeps his lofty heights, setting himself against git\-taking as against nepotism. In 1785, while in private life, two years after he ceased to be com- mander-in-chief of our armies and four years before he became President, he could not be induced to accept a certain amount of canal stock offered him by the State of Virginia, as appears in an official communication ; " It gives me great pleasure to inform you that the Assembly, without a dissenting voice, complimented you with fifty shares in the Potomac Corapanv and one hundred in the Jam^s River Company."— Wnxh- ivjjfon's Writings, Vul. IX, p. 83; Letter ot Benjamin Harrison. January 6. 1775. Fully to appreciate the reply of Washington it must be borne in mind thar, according to Washington Irving, his biographer, ''Some j degree of economy was necessary, for his ! fiuaucial affairs had suffered during the war, | and the products of his estate had fallen off." But he was not tempted. Thus he wrote : " ITow would this matter be viewed by the eye of the world, an'l what would be its opinion when it conies to be related that George Washington accepted 82O,0u0? Under whatever pretense, and however customarily these gifts are made in other countries, if I accepted this should I not henceforward be con- sidered as a dependent? I never for a moment entertained tbe idea of accei)ting \t."—ll>i(L, p. 85i. Letter to Benjamin Uarrieon, January 22, 1785. How admirably he touches the point when he asks, ''If 1 accepted this, should I not henceforward be considered as a dependent?" According to our Scripture the gift blinds the eyes; according to Washington it makes the receiver a dependent. In harmony with this sentiment was his subsequent refusal when President, as is recorded by an ingenious writer : " He was exceedingly careful about committing himself, xcould receive no favors of any kind, and scrupulously paid for everything. A large house was setapartforhimonNinthstreer.onthe grounds now covered by trie Penn'^ylvania University, which he refused to accept."— Colonel Forney's Anecdotes. By such instances brought to light recently, and shining in contrast with our times, we learn to admire anew the virtue of Washington. It would be easy to show how in all ages the refusal of gifts has been recognized as the sign of virtue, if not the requireuDeut of duty. The story of St. Louis of France is beautiful and suggestive. Leaving on a crusade he charged the Queen Regent, who remained be- hind, '' not to accept presents for herself or her children." Such was one of the injunc- tions by which this monarch, when far away on a pious expedition, impressed himself upon his country. ^ly own strong convictions on this presiden- tial pretension were aroused in a conversation which it was my privilege to enjoy with John Quincy Adams, as he sat in his sick-chamber at his son's house in Boston, a short time before he fell at his post of duty in the House of Representatives. In a voice trembling with age and with emotion, he said that no public man could take gifts without peril, and he confessed that his own judgment had been quickened by the example of Count Roman- zoff, the eminent cliaticellor of the Russian empire, who, after receiving costly gifts from foreign sovereigns with whom he had nego- tiated treaties, felt a difficulty of conscience in keeping them, and at last handed over their value to a hospital, as he related to Mr. Adams, then minister at St. Petersburg. The latter was impressed by this Russian example. ar)d through his long career, as minister abroad. Secretary of State, President, and Representa- tive, always refused gifts, unless a book or some small article in its nature a token and not a reward or bribe. The Constituiion testifies against the taking of gifts by officers of ihe United States, whea IG it provides that no person holding any office of profit or trust under ihem shall, without the consent of tl.e Congress, accept of any present or emolument, from any kiiig, prince, or foreign State. The acceptance of a pres ent or emolument from our own citizens was left without constitutional inhihition, to he constrained by the pubiic conscience and the just aversion to any semblance of bargain and Sale or bribery in the publ c service. The case of our President is exceptional. Notoriously he has taken gifts while in the public service, some at least after he had been elected Presi#i effusion of Beutiment natural toward a patron, but with- out justification in the character of the retiring officer. Shakspeare, who saw intuitively the springs of h'lman conduct, touches more than once on the operation of the gift. "Til do thee service for so good a gift," said Gloster to Warwick, 'l lien, again, how truly spoke the lord, who said of Tiinon, "no gift to him But breeds the giver a return exceeding All use of quittance ;" and such were the returns made by the Presi- dent. Thus much for gift-taking, reciprocated by office. The instance is original and without precedent in our history. THE PRESIDENCY A PERQUISITE. I have now completed the survey of the two typical instances — nepotism and gilt-takingoffi- cially compensated — in which we are compelled to see the President. In these things he shows himself Here is no portrait drawn by critic or enemy; it is the original who stands f)rth, saying. Behold the generosity 1 practice to my relations at the expense of the public ser- vice, also the gifts 1 take, and then my way of rewarding the patrons always at the expense of the public service." In this open exhibi- tion we see how the Presidency, instead of a trust, has become a perquisite. Bad as are these two capital instances, and important as is their condemnation, so that they may net become a precedent, I dwell on them now as illustrating character. A President that can do such things and not recognize at once the error he has committed, shows that super- eminence of egotism under which Constitu- tion, international Law, and municipal law, to say nothing of Republican Government in its primary principles, are all subordinated to the presidential will, and this is personal gov- ernment. Add an insensibility to the honest convictions of others, and you have a natural feature of this pretension. INSTANCES. Lawyers cite what are called "leading cases." A few of these show the presidential will iti constant operation with little regard to precedent or reason, so as to be a caprice, if it were not a pretension. Imitating tlie Popes in nepotism, the President has imitated them in ostentatious assumption of infallibility. THE president's INAUGURAL ADDRESS. Other Presidents have entered upon their high office with a certain modesty and distrust. Washington in his Inaugural address declared his "anxieties," also his sense of "the mag- nitude and difficulty of the trust" — " awaken- ing a distrustful scrutiny into his qualifica- tions." Jefferson in his famous Inaugural, so replete with political wisdom, after declaring his "sincere consciousness that the task is above his talents," s-iys: " I approach it with those anxious and awful pre- sentiments which the greatness of the charge and the 17 weakness of my powers so justly inspire," * * * * "and I humble myself belore the mag- nitude of the undertaking." Our soldier, absolutely untried in civil life, entirely a new man, enfering upon the su!'- limest duties, before which Washington ar; . Jefferson had shrunk, said in his Inaugural: "The responsibilities of the position 1 feel, but accept them without fear.''' Great prede- cessors, with aiDple preparation for the re- sponsibilities, had shrunk back with fear. He had none. Either he did not see the responsi- bilities, or the Ceesar began to stir in his bosom. SELECTION' OP HIS CABINET. Next after the Inaugural address, his first official act was the selection of his Cabinet, and here the general disappointment was equaled by the general wonder. As the President was little known except from the victories which had comm^^tided him. it was not then seen how completely characteris ic was this initial act. Looking back upon it we recog- nize the pretension by which all tradition, usage, and propriety were discarded, by which the just expecta ions of the party that had elected him were set at naught, and the safeguards of constituiional government were subordinated to the personal pretensions of One Man. In this Cabinet were persons having small relations with the Republican parfy, and little position in the country, some absolutely without claims from public service, and some absolutely disqualified by the gifts they had made to the President. Such was the political phenomenon presented for the first lime in American history, while reported sayings of the President showed the simpli- city with which he acted. To a committee he described his Cabinet as his "family" with which no stranger could be allowed to interfere, and to a member of Congress he announced that he selected his Cabinet "to please himself and nobody else" — being good rules unquestionably for the organization of a household and the choice of domestics, to which the Cabinet seems to have been likened. This personal government flowered in the Navy Department, wliere a gift-bearing Greek was suddenly changed to a Secretary. No less a personage than ihe grand old Admiral, the brave, yet modest Farragut, was reported as askinsr, on the 5th of March, the veiy day when the Cabinet was antiout»ced, in unatfected igno- rance, "Do you know anything of Borie?" And yet this unconspicuous citizen, bearer of gifts to the President, was constituted the naval superior of that historic character. If others were less obscure, the Cabinet asaunit was none the less notable as the creafure of presidential will where chance vied with lavor- ilism as arbiter. Ail this is so strange when we consider the true idea of a Cabinet. Thongh not named ia the Cotis'itution, yet by virtue otuf) broken u-^age among us, and in harmony wiili constitutional ;rovernments everywhere, the Cabinet has be- -ne a constitutional l)ody, hardly less than if CAi)ressly established by the Constitution itself. Its members, besides being the heads of great Def)arrments. are the counselors of the Presi- dent, with the duty to advise him of all matters within the sphere of his office, b^-ing nothing less thati the great catalogue in the preamble of the Constitution, beginning with duty to ttio Union, and ending with the duty to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our pos- terity. Besides undoubted fimess for these exalted responsibilities as head of a Defiart- ment, and as counselor, a member should have such acknowledged position in the coun- try thai his presence inspires cotitidence and gives strength #10 the administration. Wovr litile these things were regarded by the Presi- dent need not be said. Unquestionably the President has a discre- tion in the appointment of his Cabinet, but it is a constii uiional discretion, regulated by regard for the interests of the country, and not by mere personal will ; by statesmanship and, not by favoritism. A Cabinet is a national institution and not a presidential perquisite, unless our President is allowed to copy the example of imperial France. In all consti- tutional governtnents, the Cabinet is selected on public reasons, and with a single eye to the public servic-" ; it is noi in any respect the " family " of the sovereign, nor is it " to please himself and nobody else." English monarcha have often accepted statesmen personally dis- agreeable when they had become representa- tives of the prevailing party, as when George 111, the most obstinate of rulers, accepted Fox, and George IV, as prejudiced as his father was obstinate, accepted Canning, each bring- ing to the service commanding abilities. It is related that the Duke of Wellington, with military frankness, encountered the personal objections of the King in the latter case by saying, *• Your Majesty is the sovereigti of England, with duties to your people far above any to yourself; and these duties render it ioftperative that you should ai this time employ the abilities of the country." By such instances in a constitutional government is the Cabinet fixed as a consiituiional and not a personal body. It is only by some extraor- dinary hallucination that the President of a Republic dedicated to constitutional iibertj can imagine himself iin^'ested with a transform- ing prerogative above that of any English sov- ereign, by which his cojuselors are changed from {)ublic otficers to personal attendants, and a great, constitutional body, in which all citizens have a common interest, is made a perquisite of the President. 18 APPROPRIATION OP TlIK OFPICKS. Markpcl araon^ the spectacles which fol- lowed. an''«'«'<''«-«<-/''i'-oe. Vol. XVI, p. 319. It is difficult to imagine anything plainer than these words. No Army officer not on the retired list can hold any civil office; and then to enforce the iniiibition, it is provided that in " accep'ing or evercising the funciiotis'' of such office the commission is vacated. Now, the Blue Book, which is our political almanac, has under the head of "Executive Mansion," a list of "secretaries and clerks," be*gimiing as follows: " Secretaries, General F. T. Dent, General Horace Porter, General 0. E. Bab- cock," when, in fact, there are no such offi- cers authorized by law. Then follow the ''Private Secretary," "Assistant Private Sec- retary," and "Executive Clerks," authorized by law, but placed below those unauthorized. Nothing is said of being detailed for this pur- pose. They are openly called " Secretaries," which is a title of office; and since it is at the Executive Mansion, it must be a civil office; and yet, in defiance of law, these Army officers continue to exercise its functions, and some of them enter the Senate with messages from the President, The apology that they are "detailed " for this service is vain; no author- ity can be shown for it. But how absurd to suppose that a rule against the ext^rcise of a civil office can be evaded by a "detail." If it may be done for three Army officers why not for tiirpe dozen? Nay moie. if the civil office of Secretary at the Executive Mansion may be created without law, why not some other civil office? Atjd what is to hinder the President from surrounding himself not only with Secretaries, but with messengers, stewards, ar»d personal attendants, even a body guard, all detailed from the Army ? Why may he not en- large the military circle at the Executive Man- sion indehnitely ? If the President can be jus- tified in his present course, ihere is no limit to bis pretensions in open violation of the statute. Here the Blue Book testifies a}?ain, for it records the names of the " Secretaries" in their proper places as Army officers, thus prssenting them as holding two incompatible offices. I dismiss this transaction as another instance of presidential pretension which, in the in- terest of republican governmsnt, should be arrested, fllNUEPUBLICAX SUBORDINATION OP THE WAR DEPAET- ilKNT TO TUK GKNKRAL-lN-CillLK. From the Executive Mansion, pass now to the War Department, and there we witness the same presidential pretensions by which law, usage, and correct principle are lost in the will of One Man. The suprenncy of the civil power over the military is t) pitied in the Secretary of War, a civilian, from whom Army officers receive orders. But this beautiful rule, with its lesson of subordination to the military was suddenly set aside by our President, and i h© Secretary of War degraded to be a clerk. The 6th of March witnessed a most important order from the President reconstituting the military departments covering the southern States and placing them under officers of his choice, which purported to be signed by the Adjutant Gen- eral, by command of the General of the Army, but actually ignoring the Secretary of VV^ar. Three days later witnessed another order pro- fessing to proceed from the President, whereby in express tertns the War Department was sub- ordinated to the General-in-Chief, being Wil- liam T. Sherman, who at the time was promoted to that command. Here are the words: "The chiefs of staff, corps, departments, and bureaus will report to and act under the immediate orders of the General commanding the Army." This act of revolution, exalting the military power above the civil, showed instant fruits in an order of the General, who, upon assum- ing command, proceeded to place the several bureau officers of the War Department upon his military staff, so that for the time there was a military dictatorship with the President as its head not merely in spirit, but in actual lorm. By and by John A. iiawlins, a civilian by education and a respecter of the Constitu- tion, became Secretary of War, and, though bound to the President by personal ties, he said " check to the King." By General Order, issued from the War Department March 26, 1869, and signed by the Secretary of War, the offensive order was rescinded, and it was etijoined that "all official business which by law or regulation requires the action of the President or Secretary of War will be submitted by the chiefs of staff, corps, departments, and bureaus to the Secretary of War." Public report said that this restoration of the civil power to its rightful supremacy was not ob- tained without an intimation of resignation on the part of the Secretary. THE SECRETARY OF THE NAVY BY DEPUTY. Kindred in character was the unprecedented attempt to devolve the duties of the Navy Department upon a deputy, so that orders were to be signed " A. E. Borie, Secretary of the Navy, perD. D. Porter, Admiral," as appears in the official journal of May 11, 18(39, or, according to another instance, "Daniel D. Porter, Vice Admiral, for the Secretary of the Navy." The obvious object of this illegal arrangement was to enable the incumbent, who stood high on the list of gift makers, to 21 be Secretary without being troubled with the bu.siness of the office. Notoriout^ly he was an invalid unused to public business, who, accord- ing to liis own confession, modestly pleaded that he could t)ot apfily himself to work more than an hour a day ; but the President soothed his anxieties by promising a deputy who would do the work. And thus was this great Depart- ment made a plaything ; but public opinion and other counsels arrested the sport. Here I mention that when this incumbent left his important post it is understood that he was allowed to nominate his successor. PRKSIDEXTIAL PRETENSION AT THE INDIAN BUREAU. At the same time occurred the effort to absorb the Indian Bureau into the War Department, changing iis character as part of the civil service. Congress had already repu- diated such an attempt, but the President, not dislieartened by legislative failure, sought to accomplish it by manipulation and indir^-ction. First elevating a member of his late staff to the head of the bureau, he then by a military order, dated May 7, 18G9, proceeded to detail for the Indian service a long list of "officers left out of their regimental organization by the consolidation of the infantry regiments," assuming to do this by authority of the act of Congress of" June 30, 1834, which, after declar- ing the number of Indian agents and how they shall be appointed, providesthat itshall be competent for the President to require any military officer of the United States to execute thedutiesof Indian agent." {Statides-at-Large Vol. IV, p. 73G.) Obviously this provision had reierence to some exceptional exigency and can be no authority Ibr the general sub- stitute of military officers instead of civilians contirmed by the Senate and bound Avilh sureties for the faithlul discharge of their duties. And yet upward of sixty Army officers were in this way foisted into the Indian service. I he act of Congress of July 15, 1870, already quoted, creating an incom- patibility between military service and civil, was aimed partly at this abuse, and these officers ceased to be Indian agents. But this attempt is another illustration of presidential pretension. MILITARY INTERFERENCE AT ELECTIONS. Then followed military interference in elec- tions, and the repeated use of the military in aid of the Revenue Law under circumstances of doubtful legality, until at last General Halleck and General Sherman protested ; the former, in his report of October 24, 1870, sayitig, " 1 respectfully repeat the recommendation of my last annual report, that military officers should not interfere in local civil difficulties, unless called out in the manner provided by law;" and the latter, in his report of November 10, 1870, "I think the soldiers ought not to be expected to make individual arrests, or to do any act of violence except in their capacity as a posse comilatus duly summoned by the United States marshal and acting in his per- sotial presence." And so this military pre- tension, invading civil affairs, was arrested. PRESIDENTIAL PRETENSION AGAIN. Meanwhile this same presidential usurpation subordinating all to himself, became palpable in another form. It whs said of Gustavus Adolphus that he drilled his Diet to vote at the word of command. Such at the outset seemed to be the presidential policy with regard to Congress, We were to vote as he desired. He did not like the tenure of office act, and dur- inj; the first month of his administration his influence was felt in both branches of Cottgresa to secure its repeal — all of which seemed more astonishing when it was considered that he en- tered upon his high trust with the ostentatious avowal that all laws would be faithfully exe- cuted whether they met his approval or not, and that he should have no policy to enforce against the will of the people. That beneficent statute which he had upheld in the impeach- ment of President Johnson was a limitation on the presidential power of appointment, and he could not brook it. Here was plain inter- feretice wiih his great perquisite of office, and Congress must be coerced to repeal it. The House acted promptly and passed tlie desired bill. In the Senate there was delay and a protracted debate, during which the official journal announced: **The President, in conversation with a prominent Senator a few days since, declared that it was his intention not to send in any nomination until defin- ite action was taken by Congress upon the teuure- of-oflice bill." Here I venture to add that a member of the Cabinet pressed me to withdraw my opposition to the repeal, saying that the President felt strongly upon it. I could not understand how a Republican President could consetit to weaken the limitations upon the Executive, and so I said, adding, that in my judgment he should rather reach forth his hands and ask to have them tied. Better always a government of law than of men. PRESIDENTIAL INTERFERENCE IN LOCAL POLITICS. In this tyrannical spirit, and iti the assump- tion of his centra! imperialism, he has inter- fered with political questions and party move- ments in distant States, reaching into Missouri and then into New York to dictate how the people should vote, then manipulating Louis- iana through a broiher-in law appointed col- lector. With him a custom-house seems less a place for the collection ot' revenue than an engine of political influence through which his dictatorship may be mainta ned. Authentic tesiimony places this tyrannical abuse beyond question. New York is the scene and Thomas Murphy, collector, the 22 Presidential lieutenant. Nobody doubts the intimacy between the Presideiit and the eol- leeior, who are bound in friendship by other ties than those of sea side tteighborhood. The collector was determined to ol)tain the contri)! of the Republican Slate convention, and ap- pealed to a patriot citizen for help, who re- plied that in his judt>ment "it would be a delicate matter for office holders to undertake to dictate to the associations in the different districts who should go from them to the Stale convention, and still more delicate to attempt to control the judgments of men employed in the different departments as to the best men to represent them." The brave collector lieutenant of the President said "that he should not hesitate to do it; that it was Gen- eral Grant's wish, and General Grant was the head of the Republican party, and should be authority on this subject." (iVeMJ York Custom- J louse Investigation, Vol. 1, p. 581. Te>timony of General Palmer.) Plainly, the Kepuhlican party was his perquisite, and all Republicans were to do his bidding. From the same testimony it appears that the Presi dent, according to the statement of his lieu tenant, "wanted to be represented in the con- ventii)n," being the Republican State conven- tion of New York ; " wanted to have his Iriends therein the convention;" and the presiden- tial lieutenant, being none other than the famous collector, offered to appoint four men in the custom-house if the witness would secure the nomination of certain persons as delegates from his district, and he promised " lhat he would immediately send their names on to Washington and have ihem appointed." {Ibid., p. 02G. Testimony of William Aikinson.) And so the presidential dictatorship was admin- istered. Offices in the custom house were openly bartered for votes in the Stale conven tion. Here was intolerable tyranny, with de- moralizaiion like that of the slave market. But New York is not the only scene of this outrage. 'J'he presidential pretension extends everywhere; nor is it easy to measure ihe arrogance of corruption or the honest indigna- tion ii quickens inio life. PRESIDENTIAL CONTRIVANCE AGAINST ST. DOMINGO. These presidential pretensions in all their variety, personal and military, with reckless inditference to law, naturally ripened in the contrivance, nursed in hot-house secrecy, against the peace of the island of St. Do mmgo — 1 say deliberately, against the peace of that island, for under the guise of annex- ing a poriiun there was menace to the Black Republic of ilayti. This whole busi- ness, absolutely indefensible from beginning to end, being wrong at every point, is the spe- cial and most characteristic product of the Administration, into which it infused and pro- jected itself more thau into anyihiug else. In this multiform disobedience we behold our President. Already I have referred to this contrivance as marking an epoch in [tresiden- lial pretensions. It, is my du'y now lo show its true character as a warning against its author. A few weeks only after beginning his career asacivilian, and while occupied with military usurpations and the perquisites of office, he was tempted by overtures of Dominican plotters, headed by the usurper Baez aiid the specu- lator Cazneau, the first an auiidetl by a military staff. The same instru- ment contained the unblushing stipulation that "his Excellency General Grant, President of the Unitrd States, promises prioafeli/ to use all his injluence in order that ttie idea of annexing the Dominican Republic to the Unittd States may acquire such a degree of popularity among the members of Congress as will be necessary lor iis acrornplishmeni ," which is simply that the President shall become a lobbyist to bniig about the annexion by 23 Congress. Such was the strange beginning, illegal, unconstitutional, and otfensive in every particular, but showing the presidential char- acter. On his return to Washington the young offi- cer, who had assumed to be "Aid-de-Camp of his Excellency General Ulysses S. Grant" and had bound the President to become a sobbyist for a wretched scheme, instead of being disowned and reprimanded, was sent back to the usurper with instructions to nego- tiate two treaties, one for the annexion of the half island of Dominica and the other for the lease of the bay of Saraana. By the Consti- tution ot the United Slates "embassadors and other public mitiisters" are appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate; but our Aid-de Camp had no such commission. Presidential prerogative empowered him, nor was naval force wanting. With three war ships at his disposal he entered upon negotiation with Baez and obtained the two treaties. Naturally force was needed to keep the usurper in power while he sold his country, and naturally such a transaction re- quired a presideniial Aid-de-Carap unknown to Constitution or law, rather than a civilian duly appointed according to both. PRESIDENTIAL VIOLATIONS OP CONSITUTIONAL AND INTKKNATIONAL LAW. On Other occasions it has been my solemn duty to expose the outrages which attended this hateful business, where at each step we are brought face to face with presidential pre- tension ; first, in the open seizure of the war powers of the Government, as if he were already Caesar, forcibly intervening in Domin ica and menacing war to Hayti, all ot which is proved by the official reports of the State Department and Navy Department, being nothing less than war by kingly prerogative in defiance of that distinctive principle of repub- lican government, first embodied in our Con- stitution, which places the war powers under the safeguard of the legislative branch, making any attempt by the President " to declare war" an undoubted usurpation. But our President, like Gallio, cares for none of these things. The open violation of the Consiiiu tion was naturally followed by a barelaced disregard of that equality of nations, which is the first principle ot International Law, as the equality of men is the first principle of the Declaration of Independence ; and this sacred rule was set aside in order to insult and men- ace Hayti, doing unto the Black Republic what we would nut have that Republic do unto us, nor what we would have done to any white Power. To these eminent and most painful presidential pretensions, the first adverse to the Constitution and the second adverse to Inter- national Law, add the imprisonment of an Auiericau citizen in Dominica by the presi- dential confederate Baez for fear of his hos- tility to the treaty if he were allowed to reach New York, all of which was known to his subordinates, Babcock and Cazneau, and doubtless to himself. What was the liberty of an American citizen compared with the presidential prerogative? To one who had defied the Constitution, on which depends the liberty of all, and then defied International Law, on which depends the peaoe of the world, a single citizen immured in a distant dungeon was of small moment. But this is only an illustration. Add now the lawless occupation of the Bay of Samana for many months after the lapse of the Treaty, keeping the national flag flying there and assuming a territorial sov- ereignty which did not exist. Then add the pro- tracted support of Baez in his usurped power to the extent of placing the national flag at his disposal, and girdling the island with our ships of war, all at immense cost and to the neglect of other service where the Navy was needed. PRESIDENTIAL EFFORTS FOR THE CONTRIVANCE. This strange succession of acts, which if established for a precedent would overturn Constitution and law, was followed by another class of presidential manilestations, being, first, an unseemly importunity of .Senators during the pendency of the Treaty, visiting the Capitol as a lobbyist and summoning them to his presence in squads in obvious pursuance of the stipulation made by his Aid-de-Camp and never disowned by him, being intervention in the Senate, reenforced by all the influence of the appointing power, whether by reward or menace, all of which was as unconstitutional in character as that warlike intervention on the island ; and then, after debate in the Senate, when the treaty was lost on solemn vote, we were called to witness his self-willed effrontery in proseeuting'the fatal error, return- ing to the charge in his Annual ^Message at the ensuing session, insisting upon his con- trivance as nothing less than the means by which "our large debt abroad is to be ulti- mately extinguished," and gravely charging the Senate with "folly " in rejecting the treaty, and yet while making this astounding charge against a coordinate branch of Government, and claiming such astounding profits, he blundered geographically in describing the prize. All this diversified performance, with its various eccentricity of effort, failed. The re- port of able commissioners transported to the island in an expensive war-ship ended in nothing. The American people rose against the undertaking and insisted upon its aban- donment. By a message charged with Parthian shafts the President at length announced that he would proceed no further in this business. His senatorial partisans, being a majority of the Chamber, after denouncing those who had 24 exposed the business, arrested the discussion, lu obedience to iriepressible sentiments, and according to the logic of uiy life, 1 fell it my duty to speak, but the President would not forgive ine, and his peculiar representatives found me disloyal to the party which I had served so long and helped to found. Then was devotion to the President made the shib- boleth of party. WHERE WAS THE GHAND INQUEST OP THE NATION ? Such is a summary of the St. Domingo busi- ness in its characteristic features ; but here are transgressions in every form — open violation of the Constitution in more than one essential requirement, open violation of International Law iti more than one of its most beautiful principles, flagrant insult to the Black Repub- lic with menace of war, complicity with tlie wrongful imprisonment of an American citi- zen, lawless assumption of territorial sov- ereignty in a foreign jurisdiction, employment of the national Navy to sustain a usurper, being all acts of substance, maintained by an agent calling himself " Aid-de Camp of Ulys- ses S. Grant, President of the Unitt-d States," and stipulating that his chief should play the lobbyist to help the contrivance through Con- gress, then urged by private appeals to Sen- ators and the influence of the appointing power tyrannically employed by the presi- dential lobbyist, and finally urged anew in an Annual Message where undisguised insult to the Senate vies with absurdity in declaring prospective profits and with geographical igno- rance. Such, in brief, is this multiform dis- obedience, where every particular is of such aggravation as to merit the most solemn judg- ment. Why the Grand Inquest of the nation, which brought Andrew Johnson to the bar of the Senate, should have slept on this con- glomerate misdemeanor, every part of which was offensive beyond any technical offense charged against his predecessor, while it had a back-ground of nepotism, gift-taking offi- tially compensated, and various presidential pretensions beyond all precedent — all this will be one of the riddles of American history, to be explained only by the extent to which the One Man Power had succeeded in subjugating Ihe Government. INDIGNITY TO THE AFEICiiN RACE. Let me confess, sir, that, while at each stage I have felt this tyranny most keenly, and never doubted that it ought to be arrested by im- peachment, my feelings have been most stirred by the outrage to llayti, which, besides being a wrong to the Black Republic, was an insult to the colored race not only abroad but here at home. How a Chief Magistrate with four millions of colored lellow-citizens could have done this thing passes comprehension. Did he suppose it would not be known? Did he iixiagiue it could be hushed ia olficial pigeou- holes ? Or was he insensible to the true char- acter of his own conduct? 'J he facts are indisputable. For more than two generations Hnyii had been independent, eniided under International Law to equality among nations, and since emancipation in our couniry, com- mended to us as an example of self-gov- ernment, being the first in the liistory of the African race and the promise i-f ihe future. And yet our President, in his effort to secure that Naboth's vineyard on which he had set his eyes, not content with maintaining the usurper Baez m power, occupying the liarbors of Dominica with war-ships, sent other war- ships, being none other than our m(jst power- ful monitor, the Dictator, with thefngaie Sev- ern as consort, and with yet other monitors in their train to strike at the independence of the Black Republic and to menace it wiih war. Do 1 err in any way, am 1 not entirely right when I say that here was unpardonahle oat- rage to the African race? As one who for years has stood by the side of this much- oppressed people, sympathizing always in their woes and struggling for them, I fell the blow which the President dealt, and it became the more intolerable from the lieariless at- tempts to defend it. Alas! that our Presi- dent should be willing to wield the giant strength of the great Republic in trampling upon the representative Government of the African race, Alas I that he did not see the infinite debt of friendship, kindness, and pro- tection due to that people, so that instead of monitors and war-ships, breathing violence, he had sent a messenger of peace and good will. This outrage was followed by an incident in which the same sentiments were revealed. Frederick Douglass, remarkable for his intelli- gence as for his eloquence, and always agree- able in personal relations, whose only ofiense is a skin not entirely Caucasian, was selected by the President to accompany the St. Do- mingo commissioners, and yet ou liis return, and almost within sight of the Executive Mansion, he was repelled from the common table of the mail steamer on the Potomac, where his companions were already seated, and thus through him was the African race insulted, and their equal rights denied, but the President whose commission he had borne neither did or said anything to right this wrong, and a few days later, when entertain- ing the commissioners at the Executive Man- sion, actually forgot the colored orator whose , services he had sought. But this indignity is in unison with tlie rest. After insulting the Black Republic, it is easy to see how natural it was to treat wiih itisensibiliiy the repre- sentative of the African race. ALL THESE THINGS IN ISSUE NOW. I Here I stay this painful catalogue in its 25 various heads, beginning with Nepotism and Gift-taking olticiH,lly compensated, and ending in the contrivance against St. Domingo wiili indignity to the Africafi race, not because it is complete, but because it is enough. With sorrow unspeakable have I made this ex- posure of pretensions which for the sake of Republican Iiistiturions every good citizen should wish expunged from history ; but I had no alternHtive, The President hirast-lf insists upon glutting them it) issue ; lie will not allow them to be forgot'en. As a candidate for reelection he invites judgment, while par tisans acting in his behalf make it absolutely necessary by the brutality of their assault on faiihful Republicans unwilling to see their party, like the firesideiitial otKce, a personal perquisite. Jf liis partisans are exacting, vin- dictive, and unjust, they act only in harmony "with his nature loo truly represented in theui. Q'here is not a ring, whether military or senatorial, that dofs not derive its distinctive character from himself t herefore what they do and what they sny must be considered as done and said by the chieftain they serve. And here is a new manifestation o( tliat sov- eign egfitisin which no taciturnity can cover up, and a new motive for inquiry into its per- nicious influence. THE GREAT PRESIDENTIAL QUARRELER. Any presentment of the President would be imperfect which did not sliow how this utigov- ernable personal it}' breaks forth in quarrel, making him the grefit [tresidential quarreler of our liisiory. As in nepotism, gift-taking offi- cially compensated, and presidential preien- sioiis generally, here a;j:ain he is foremost, h;iv- ing quarreled not, only more than any other Piesident, but more than all others together from George Washitigton to himself. His own Cabinet, the Senate, the House of Itepresenta- tives, the diplomatic service and the civil ser- vice getiorally, all have their victims, nearly every one of whom , besides serving the Repub- lican party, had helped to make him Piesident. Nor liave Army officers, his companions in the held, or even liis generous patrons, been exempt. To him a quarrel is not only a con- stant necessity hut a perquisite of office. To nurse a quarrel, like tending a horse, is in his list of presidential duties. How idle must he be should the woi ds of Sliakspeare be fulfilled, "I'his dayall quarrels die. " To him may be applied those other words of Shakspeare, "as quarrelous as the weasel." Evidently our President has never read the Eleventh Commandment: ''A President of the Ufiited States shall never quarrel." At least he lives in perpetual violation of it, lis- tening to stoiies from horse cars, gobbling the gossip of his military ling, discoutsnig on itn- aginary griefs, and nursing an unjust anger. Ihe elect of forty millions of people has no right to quarrel with anybody. His position is too exalted. He cannot do it without offense to the requirements of patriotism, without a shock to the decencies of life, without a jar to the harmony of the universe. If lesson were needed for his conduct he might find it in that King of France, who, on ascending the throne, made haste to declare that he did not remember injuries received as Dauphin. Perhaps a better model still would be Tancred, the acknowledged type of the per- fect Christian knight, who "disdained to speak ill of whoever it might be, even when ill had been Sfioken of hitnself." Our soldier Pres- ident could not err in following this knijihtly example. If this were too much then at least might we hope that he would consent to limit the sphere of his quarrelsome operations, so that the public service might not be disturbed, or this be assured. In every quarrel he is the offender, according to the fact, as according to every reasonable presumption ; especially is he responsible for its continuance. The President can always choose his relations with any citizen. But he chooses discord. With the arrogance of arms he resents any imped- iment in his path, as wheti, in the spring of 1870, without allusion to himself, I felt it my duty to oppo'^e his St. Domingo contrivance. The verse of Juvenal, as tratislated by Dryden {Satires, III, 4G4, 4G8,) describes his conduct. ** Poor me he fights, if that be fighting, where He only cudgels, and 1 only bear." " Answer or answer not, 'tis all the same, lie lays me on and makes me bear the blame. Another scholarly translator gives to this description of the presidential quarrel another form, which is also applicable : " If that be deemed a qunrrel where, heaven knows. Ho only gives and I receive tiie blows — Across my path he strides and bids me stand I — I bow obsequious to the dread command." If the latter verse is not entirely true in my case, something must be pardoned to that liberty in which I was born. Met) take their places in history according to their deeds. The flattery of life is then superseded by the truthlul record, and rulers do not escape judgment. Louis X, of France, has the designation of Le Ilutin or The Quarreler," by which he is known in the long line of French kinjrs. And so in the long line of American Chief Magistrates has our Pres- ident vindicated for himst If t he same title. He must wear it. The French monarch was younger than our President; but there are other points in his life which are not without parallel. According to a contemporary chron- icle he was " well-disposed luit not very atten- tive to the neeiis of the kingdom" — vnhntif rnais pas Men euteiit/f en ce qti an royaume il J'alluit ; and then again it was his rare foriune to sign one of the greatest ordinances of French 26 history, declaring that according to nature all men have ihe riglit to be free; but the Quar reler was in no respect author of this illus- trious act, and was moved to its adoption by considerations of personal advantage. It will be for impartial history to determine if our Quarreler, who treated his great office as a personal perquisite, and all his life long was against that Enfranchisement to which lie put bis name, does not fall into the same category. DUTY OK THK REPUBLICAN PARTT. And now the question of duty is distinctly presented to the Republican party. I like that word. It is at the mandate of duty that we must act. Do the presidential pretensions merit the sanction of the party ? Can Kepub- licatis without departing from all obligations, whether of party or patriotism, recognize our ambitious Caesar as a proper representative? Can we take the fearful responsibility of his prolonged empire? I put these questions solemnly, as a member of the Republican party, wiih all the earnestness of a life devoted to the triumph of this party, but which I served always with the conviction that 1 gave up notliir)g that was meant for country or mankind. With me the party was country and mankind; but with the adoption of all these presidential pretensions, the party loses its distinctive character and drops from its sphere. Its creed ceases to be Republicanism and becomes Grantism ; its members cease to be Republicans and become Grant-men. It is no longer a political party, but a personal parly. For myself, I say openly, 1 am no man's man ; nor do 1 belong to any personal party. ONE TERM FOR PRKSIDKNT. The attempt to change the character of the Republican party begins by assault on the principle of One Term for President. There- fore nmst our sup{>ort of this requirement be made inaniff St ; and here we have the testimony of our President and what is stronger, his example, showing the necessity of such limita- tion. Authentic report attests that before his nomination he declared that " The liberties of the country cannot be maintained without a One Term amendment of the Constitution." At this time Mr. Wade was pressing this very amend'nent. Then after his nomination, and while his election was ppndir.g, the organ of the Republican party at Washingtoti, wiiere he resided, commended him constantly as faithful to the principle. The Morning Chronicle of June 3, 1800, a'ter the canva-*s hnd commenced, proclaimed of the candidate, '"He u, moreover, an adcocate of the One Term principle as con- ducing towai d ihe proper administration of the law — a principle with which so many prominent Republicans h;ive identi6ed themselves that it may be accepted as an article of party faith." Then again, July 14, the same organ insisted, " Let not Congress adjourn without passing the One-Term amendment to the Constitution. There has never been so favorable an opportun- ity. All partiesarein favor of it. General Grant is in favor of it. The party that su|)ports Gen- eral Grunt demands it, and above all else pub- lic morality calls for it." Consideriiii? that these pledijes were made by an organ of the pnrty, and in his very presence, they may be accepted as prf)ceeding from liim. His name must be added to the list wirh Andrew Jackson. William ilenry Harrison, Henry Clay, and Benjamia F. Wade, all of whom are enrolled against the reeligibiiity of a President. But his example as President is more than his testimony in showing the necessity of this limitation. Andrew Jackson did not hes- itate to say that it was required in order to place the President " beyond the reach of any improper influence and uncommitted to any other course than the strict line of constitu- tional duty." William Henry Harrison fol- lowed in declaring that with the adoption of this principle "the incumbent would devote all his time to the public interest and there would be no cause to misrule the country." Henry Clay was satisfied after much observa- tion and reflection " that too much of the time the thoughts and the exertions of the incumbent are occupied during the first term in securing his reelection." Benjamin F. Wade, after denouncing the re'eli>4ibility of the President, said: "There are defects in the Constitution, and this is among the most glaring." And now our President by his example, besides his testimony, vindicates all these authorities. He makes us see how all that has been predicted of Presidents seeking reelec- tion is fulfilled ; how this desire dominates official conduct; how naturally the resources of the Government are employed to serve a personal purpose; how the natiotial interests are subordinate to individual advancement ; how all questions, foreign or domesiic, whether of treaties or laws, are handled with a view to electoral votes ; how the appointing power lends itself to a selfish will, acting no>v by tbe temptation of office and then by the menace of removal; and, since every officeholder and every office seeker has a brevet commissisa in the predominant political party, how the Pres- ident, desiring reelection, becomes the active head of three cooperating armies, the army of officeholders eighty thousand strong, the larger army of officeseekers, and the army of the political party, the whole constituting a consolidated power which no candida'e can possess without peril to his country. Of these vast cociperaiing armies the President is com- m inder-in-chief and generalissimo. 'J'hrough these he holds in submission even Represent- atives and Senators, and m;ikes the country his vassal with a cuudition not unlike that of 27 martial law where the disobedient are shot, while the vnritxi.s ring^^ help secure the prize. Thut this is not too siroiig appears from testi- mony before a S^-nute Coiiiininee. where a f)res- ideiitiMl lieuteriHiU boldly denounced an eminent New York ciiizen, who was a prominent can- didate for Governor, as " obnoxious to General Grant," and, then with an effrontery like the presidential pretension, announced lliat ''President Grant whs the representative and bead of tlie llepublican party, and ail cood Republicans should support him iti all ids measures and H[ipointrnents. and any one who did noi do it sliould be cru.shed uut.'^ Sucii thitigs teach how wise were those statesmen who would not subject the Pre->idenr, to the temptation or even the suspicion of using his vast powers in promoting personal ends. Unquestionably the Que Man Power has in- creased latterly lieyond example, owing partly to the greater facilities of intercourse, espe- cially i)y telej^raph, so that the whole country is ea-ily reached ; partly tu inifirovemeuts it; or- i ganizaiion. by which distant f. laces are brought ! into uniiy ; and partly through the protracted ; prevalence of the military spirit created by the j war. There was a time in English history when the House of Commons, on the motion \ of the f.imous lawyer, Mr. Dunning, adopted ! the resolution: "That the influence of the j Crown has increased, is increasing, and ought j to be diminished.'' The same declaration is ' needed with regard to the President ; and the very words of the parliamentary pa' riot may be repealed. In his memorable speech, Mr. Dunrnni^, aftersayingthat hcdid not recfufion proof idle to require,'* declared tliat the ques- } tion '"must be decided by the consciences of | those who, as a jury, were called to determine | ■what Was or was not within their own knowl- j edge," (llansaid, Fatiiamentavy Uistory, \ April. ITSU, Vol. XXI, p. 317.) It was on \ ground of notoriety cognizable to all that he ! acted. And preci-^ely on this ground, but also : with specific proofs, do I insist tiiat iiie influ- ence of the President has increased, is increas- ing, and ought to be diminished. But in this excellent work, well woriliy the best efforts of all, nothing is more important than the limit- ation to (me term. ' ■J'here is a demand for reform in the Civil | Service, and the President formally adopts this ! demand ; but he neglects the first step, which j depends only on himself. From this we may ' judge his little earnestness in the cause. Be- | yond all question. Civil Service Reform must j begin by a limitation of the President to one | term, so that the tem{)taiiou to use the appoint- 1 ing power for personal ends may disappear from ' our system, and tliis great disturbittg force cease to exi'^t. If the President is sincere for reform, it will be easy for him to set the exam- ple by declaring again his adhesion to the Oue- Term principle. But even if he fails we must do our duty. Therefore, in opposing the prolonged power of the present incumbent, I be^iii by insisiing that, for the good of the country and wiihout reference to any personal failure, no President should be a candidate for reelection ; and it ia our duty now to set an example wonhy of Re- publican Insiiuitions. In the name of the One- Term principle, once recognized by him, and wliich needs no other evidence of its necessity than his own Presidency, 1 protest against his attempt to ob ain another lease of power. But this protest is on the threshold. UXKIT.VESS FOR THE PRESIDENTIAL OFFICE. I protest against him as radically unfit for the presidential office, beiui^ esseniiaily mili- tary in nature, without experience in civil life, without aptitude for civil dut'.es, and without knowledge of republican institutions, ail of which is perfecily apparetit, unless we are ready to assume that the matters and things set forth to-day are of no account — and then in furtlier support of the candidate, boldly declare that nepotism in a President is noih- ing, that gift-taking with repayment in official patronage is nothiui^, that violation of the Constitution and of law international and mu- nicipal is nothing, ihat indignity to the African race is nothing, that quarrel wiih political as- sociates is notliing, and that all his presiden- tial pretensions in their motley a^^gregaiion, being a new Caesarism or personal govern- ment, are nothing. But if these are all noth- ing, then is the Republican f)arry nothing^ nor is there any safeguard for republicaa institutions. APOLOGIES. Two apologies 1 hear. The first is that he means well and errs from want of knowledge. This is not much. It was said of Louis the Quarreller, tiiat he meant well; nor is there a slate headstone in any village burial ground that does not record as much of the humble lodger beneath. Some- thing more is needed for a President. Nor can we afford to perpetuate power in a ruler who errs so much from ignorance. Char.ty for the past I concede , but no investiture for the future. The other apology is that his Presidency has been successful. How? When? Where? Not to him can be attributed that general prosperity whi. h is the natural outgrowth of our people and country, for his contribution is not traced in the abounding resuit. Oar golden fi-lds. pro- ductive mines, busy industry, diversified com*, merce owe nothing to him. Show, then, his success. Is it in the finances? The national debt has been reduced ; but not to so large an amount as by Andrew Johnson in the same space of time. Litile merit is due to either, tor each employed the means allowed 28 by Congress. To the American people is this reduction due, and not to any President. And while our President in this respect is no better than his predecessor, he can chiiin no merit for any systetnatic effort to reduce taxa- tion or restore specie payments. Perhaps, then, it is in foreign relations that he claims the laurels he is to wear. Knowing some thing of these from careful study and years of practical acquaintance, I am bound to say that never betbre has their management been 80 wanting in ability and so al)solutely without cliaracter. Wirh so much pretension an tiot every otHce-holder do the same? If he disreg;irds constitution and law iu the pursuit of personal obj'^crs how can we expect a just suboidinatioii Irom othets? If he sets up preten.-ions without number, repugnant to liepublicau institutions, must not tiie good cause sut!er? If he is stubborn, obstinate, and perverse are not stubb )rnness, obstinacy and perversity commended for imitation ? If he insults and wrongs associates in official trust, who is safe from the malignant influence hav- itig its propulsion from the Executive Man- sion ? If he fra'erirzes with jobbers and Hes- sians, where is the limit to the demoralization that must ensue ? Necessarilv the puldic ser- vice takes its character from its elected chief and the whole country reflects the President 30 His example is u law. But a bad example must be corrected as a bad law. APPEAL TO THE REPUBLICAN PARTY. To tbe Republican parfy. devoted to idea>^ and principles, I turn now with more ihaii ordinary solicitude. Not willii:g!y can I see it Saciiticed. Not without earne.vt effdrt atrairist the betrjiyal can I suffer its ideas and princi- ples 10 be I'^st in the personal pretensions of one man. B'>th the old parties are in a crisis, with ihis ditference between the two. 'l"he Democracy is dissolvins; : the itepublican party is being absorbed. The Democracy is falling apart, thus visibly losing vs vital unity ; the llepuhlican party is submitting to a pers'mal influence, thus visibly losing its viial charac- ter. The Democracy is ceasing to exist, 'i'he Kepublican party is losing its identi'y. Let the process be completed, and it will he no longer that liepublicati jiarty which I helped ' to found and have always served, but onlv a personal party, while instead of those ideas and principles which we have been so proud to uphold will be presidential pretensions, and instead of Ivepublicanisin there will be nothing but Grantism. Political parties are losing their sway. Higher than party are country and the duty to save it fi om Caesar. The caucus is at last un derstood as a political engine, moved by wire- pullers. :itid it becomes more insupportable in j)roportion as directed to personal ends ; nor is Its character changed when called a National Convt^ntion. Here too are wire-pullers, and when the great Officeholder and the great Officeseekcr arc one and the same, it is easy to see how naturally the engine responds to the Central touch. A polincal convention is an agency and convenience, but never a law. least 01 all a ucbpotism ; and when ii seeks to impose a candidate whose name is a synonym of pre- tensions unrejtublican in character and hostile to gocd government, it will be for earnest ltepul)licans to consider well how clearly party is subordinate to country. Such a nominaiiua c^n have no just obligaiion. 'i'herefore wii h unspeakable interest will the country watch the National Convention at Philadelphia. It may be an assembly (and such is my hope!) where ideas and principles are above ail per- sonal pretensions, atid the unity of the party is symbolized in the candidate or it may add another to presidental rings, beiiig an expan- sion of the miljtaiy ring at the Executive Mansion, the senatorial rinj; in this Chamber, and the political ring in the custom houses of New York and New Orleans. A National Convention whi( h is a presidental ring cannot represent the lle[>ublicun party. Much rather would i see the party, to which I am dedicated, under the image of a life-boat not to be sunk by wind or wave. How often have 1 said this to cheer my comrades. 1 do not fear the Democratic party. Nothing from them can harm our life-boat. But I do tear a quarrelsome pilot, unused to the sea, but pre- tentious in command, who occupies himself in loading aboard his own unserviceable relauons and personal patrons while he drives aw;iy the experienced seamen who know the craU and her voj au'e. Here is a peril which no life-boat can s'and. Meanwhile I wait the- determination of the National Convention, where are delegates from my own much honored Commonwealth with whom I rejoice to act. Not without anxiety do I wait, but with the earnest hope that the Convention will bring the ltef)ublicaQ party into ancient harmony, saving it espe- cially from the suicidal lolly of an issue on the personal pretensions of one man. \