The Cleveland Era, A Chronicle of the New Order in Politics | Page 9

the State."
Except in the case of their remonstrance against the Robertson
appointment, they had "never even expressed an opinion to the
President in any case unless questioned in regard to it." Along with this
statement the New York Senators transmitted their resignations, saying
"we hold it respectful and becoming to make room for those who may
correct all the errors we have made, and interpret aright all the duties
we have misconceived."
The New York Legislature was then in session. Conkling and Platt
offered themselves as candidates for reelection, and a protracted
factional struggle ensued; in the course of which, the nation was
shocked by the news that President Garfield had been assassinated by a
disappointed once seeker in a Washington railway station on July 2,
1881. The President died from the effects of the wound on the 19th of
September. Meanwhile, the contest in the New York Legislature
continued until the 22d of July when the deadlock was broken by the
election of Warner Miller and Elbridge G. Lapham to fill the vacancies.
The deep disgust with which the nation regarded this factional war, and
the horror inspired by the assassination of President Garfield, produced
a revulsion of public opinion in favor of civil service reform so
energetic as to overcome congressional antipathy. Senator Pendleton's
bill to introduce the merit system, which had been pending for nearly
two years, was passed by the Senate on December 27, 1882, and by the
House on January 4, 1883. The importance of the act lay in its
recognition of the principles of the reform and in its provision of means
by which the President could apply those principles. A Civil Service
Commission was created, and the President was authorized to classify
the Civil Service and to provide selection by competitive examination
for all appointments to the service thus classified. The law was
essentially an enabling act, and its practical efficacy was contingent
upon executive discretion.

CHAPTER II.
POLITICAL GROPING AND PARTY FLUCTUATION
President Garfield's career was cut short so soon after his accession to
office, that he had no opportunity of showing whether he had the will

and the power to obtain action for the redress of public grievances,
which the congressional factions were disposed to ignore. His
experience and his attainments were such as should have qualified him
for the task, and in his public life he had shown firmness of character.
His courageous opposition to the greenback movement in Ohio had
been of great service to the nation in maintaining the standard of value.
When a party convention in his district passed resolutions in favor of
paying interest on the bonds with paper instead of coin, he gave a rare
instance of political intrepidity by declaring that he would not accept
the nomination on such a platform. It was the deliberate opinion of
Senator Hoar, who knew Garfield intimately, that "next to the
assassination of Lincoln, his death was the greatest national misfortune
ever caused to this country by the loss of a single life."
The lingering illness of President Garfield raised a serious question
about presidential authority which is still unsettled. For over two
months before he died he was unable to attend to any duties of office.
The Constitution provides that "in case of the removal of the President
from office, or of his death, resignation, or inability to discharge the
powers and duties of the said office, the same shall devolve on the
Vice-President." What is the practical significance of the term
"inability"? If it should be accepted in its ordinary meaning, a
prostrating illness would be regarded as sufficient reason for allowing
the Vice-President to assume presidential responsibility. Though there
was much quiet discussion of the problem, no attempt was made to
press a decision. After Garfield died, President Arthur, on succeeding
to the office, took up the matter in his first annual message, putting a
number of queries as to the actual significance of the language of the
Constitution--queries which have yet to be answered. The rights and
duties of the Vice-President in this particular are dangerously vague.
The situation is complicated by a peculiarity of the electoral system. In
theory, by electing a President the nation expresses its will respecting
public policy; but in practice the candidate for President may be an
exponent of one school of opinion and the candidate for Vice-President
may represent another view. It is impossible for a voter to discriminate
between the two; he cannot vote for the candidate for President without
voting for the candidate for Vice-President, since he does not vote
directly for the candidates themselves but for the party electors who are

pledged to the entire party ticket. Party conventions take advantage of
this disability on the part of the voter to work an electioneering device