all agree with those who say that, when you remove one man and appoint another, the only important thing is the quality of the man appointed, and not the reasons for the removal. On the contrary, it seems to me that the public pledge of the President makes his reasons for making removals a matter of first importance. If our public life is to be saved from its demoralization it is essential that the promises of political parties and of public men should again count for something. It is of the highest consequence to the American people that the public pledge of a President should be regarded as a moral obligation of the very first order, which nobody would dare to make light of. It is impossible to overestimate the value of a conspicuous example of the strictest fidelity in this respect.
Your reasons for making removals are, therefore, of the greatest public interest, for upon their character depends the answer to the question whether the pledge has been kept or not.
What, then, should be done when those reasons are inquired into by persons entitled to respect? All should be done that can be done to sustain the belief of the people in the good faith of the President. How does the case stand at present? Those reasons are questioned by Senators who, whatever their motives may be, are entitled to consideration as members of the highest legislative body. But—as the truth should be told—the questioning is not confined to the Senate. It is very generally believed among the people that removals have been made in violation of the President's pledge. Whether this popular belief be well founded or not, it certainly exists. It is also very widely believed that President Cleveland has honestly meant to keep his pledge but that he has been misled by men upon the good faith and discernment of whose advice he depended in making removals and appointments, the responsibility for all of this falling upon him.
