Page:Speeches, correspondence and political papers of Carl Schurz, Volume 4.djvu/79

This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
1880]
Carl Schurz
45

to maintain the equality of all our dollars.” Can any sound-money man suggest a more radical creed? Remember I was not writing an inaugural message, nor an exhaustive essay on finance; but a brief campaign summary of Republican doctrine.

On the subject of civil service, there is more room for difference of judgment, because there are real differences of opinion among Republicans. I think I may say, without immodesty, that no member of Congress has said or done more in behalf of real reform in that service than I have. But I have been saying, for several years past, that the pressure of public opinion should be brought to bear upon Congress, rather than upon the President, to make any reform in that direction effective. If the President will sketch the outline of a bill fixing a tenure of office for all minor offices, and prescribing the grounds on which removals are to be made, and in a message urge its passage, he will concentrate the weight of public opinion upon Congress, and some action will at last be compelled. So long as he makes the fight with Congress a concrete one, involving the personality of each appointee, Congress, or rather the Senate will beat him half the time or more. If he makes it a fight of general principles with no personality involved in the contest, he can win. In short, in my letter of acceptance, I have sought to shift the battleground from the person of the appointee to the principles on which the office shall be held. Of course, I may be in error; but I think I am right. If any one thinks I have surrendered to Congressional dictation, other than by legislation, such a one will find himself greatly mistaken if the trial comes. I shall be sorry if the President is grieved at the clause of my letter to which you refer. But I have never doubted that one portion of his order no. 1 was a mistake, and was an invasion of the proper rights of those who hold Federal offices to take part in the nomination of candidates to office. In a district like mine where nomination is equivalent to election, the right to participate in the proceedings of a caucus is more important than the right to vote. The popular understanding of the order has made the holding of a local Federal office a badge of political disability. This should not be. If the order had been