no doubt prepared for; and it will be not only with the spoils hunters themselves but with a good many otherwise well-meaning people who think that reform is an excellent thing in theory but should not be carried too much into practice. Your purpose, as I understand it, is, in the first place, faithfully to execute the civil service law in letter and spirit, and secondly, as to the offices not under the civil service law, to make no removals except for “cause,” that cause including cases of the abuse of official position for partisan purposes, and to be governed in your appointments by the interests of the service. This being in its nature executive business, you will have to bear the sole responsibility for it. The opposition to this policy on the part of officeseekers and dealers in patronage, especially Members of Congress, will therefore turn against you, and it can be disarmed only by a decided attitude on the part of the Administration, supported by public opinion, as it will be, if consistent.
If the character of this struggle depended upon your own fidelity and courage alone, I should feel no anxiety at all. But it does not. Neither does it depend upon the mere laying down by the President of certain principles of action. It depends upon the fidelity and energy with which those principles are carried out by the heads of the several Departments. I know from personal experience how the mill works, and that experience has convinced me that no President, however firm and courageous he may be, can succeed in the fight for systematic administrative reform, if he has to carry on the fight against his own Cabinet. More than that: he cannot succeed unless the Cabinet, at least the heads of the principal Departments, are substantially of the same mind with him and support him in good faith and with constant energy.
The problem, I repeat, cannot be disposed of by the mere proclamation of a certain policy. It presents itself
