Democratic Sentinel, Volume 5, Number 16, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 27 May 1881 — CONKLING AND PLATT. [ARTICLE]

CONKLING AND PLATT.

Resignation of the New York Senators—Statement of the Reason* That Impelled 1 hem to Such a Course. The controversy between the President and Senator Conkling over the nomination of Judge Robertson to be Collector of the port of New York culminated, on the 10th Inst, in the resignation, by Senators Conkling and Platt, of their seats in the United States Senate. Ths action of the New York Senators in tendering their resignations, it is needless to say, created a profound sensation at the national capital, and was a sharp surprise to the country at large. Messrs. Conkling and Platt addressed the following letter to the Governor of New York, defining their position, and anpiaining their reasons fur resigning:

Washington, May 14,1M1. To His Excellency A. B. Cornell, Governor: Sib : Transmitting, as we do, our resignation*, respectively, of the great trusts with which New York has honored us, it it fit that we acquaint you, and through you the Legislature and the people of the State, with the reason* which, in our judgment, make such a step respectful and necessary. Borne week* ago the President of the United States sent to the Senate in a group the nomination of several persons for public offices already filled. One of these office* is the Collectorship of the Port of New York, now held by Gen. Merritt; another is the Consul Generalship at London, now held by Gen. Badeau; another is the Charge d’ Affaires at Denmark, held by Mr. Cramer; another ts the mission to Switzerland, held by Mr. Fish, the son of the former distinguished Secretary of State. Mr. Fish had, in deference to an anolent practice, placed his position at the disposal of the new administration, but, like other persons named, was ready to remain at his post if permitted to do s& All these officers, save only Mr. Cramer, are citizens of New York. It was proposed to displace them all, not tor any alleged faults or advantage of tho public service, but in order to give the great office of Collector of the Port of New York to Mr. William H. Robertson as a reward for certain acta of his which are said to have aided In making the nomination of Gen. Garfield possible. The chain of removals thus proposed was broken by Gen. Badeau promptly declining to accept the new post to which he was to be sent. These nominations summoned every member of tho Senate to say whether he advised such a transaction. The movement was more than a surprise. We had been told only a few hours be:ore that no removals of New York officers were soon to bo made, or even considered, and had been requested to withhold the papers and-suggestions bearing on the subject which hud been sent to us for presentation, should occasion arise, until we had notice from the President of his readiness to receive thorn. Learning that the Vice President was equally surprised, and had been equally misled, we sent to Mr. James, the Cabinet officer from our State, and learned that, though he had spent some time with the President on the morning of the day the nominations were sent in, no disclosure of the intention to send them in had been made to him, and that the first he knew of the matter was by hearsay following the event After earnest reflection and consultation we believed the proceeding unwise and wrong, whether considered who ly in relation to the preservation and integrity i f the public service and public example to be set, or in relation also to the Integrity ot the Republican party. No public utterance of comment or censure was made by either of us, in the Senate or elsewhere. On the contrary, we thought that the President would reconsider the action, so sudden and hasty, and would at least adopt less hurtful and objectionable modes of requiting personal or individual service. In this hope, the following paper was prepared, signed and presented by Mr. James to the President, who was subsequently informed that you iiad authorized your name to be added also: To the President: We beg leave to remonstrate against the change in the Collectorship of New York by the removal >f Mr. Merritt and the appointment of Mr. Robertson. The proposal was wholly a surprise. We heard of it only when several nominations involved In the plan were announced in the Senate. We had only two days before this been informed from you that a change in the custom, offices at New Yo: k was not contemplated, and, quite ignorant of the purpose to take any action now, we had no opportunity until after the nominations to male tho suggestions we now present. We do not be ievo that ths interests of the public service will be promoted by removing the present Collector and putting Mr. Robertson in his stead. Our opinion is quite the reverse, and we believe no political advantage can be gained for either the Republican party or Its principles. Believing that no indti idual has claims or obligation, v> hich should be liquidated in such a mode, we earnistly arid respevtfmly ask that the nomination of Mr. Robertson be withdrawn. Chester A. Arthur. 8. C. Platt. Thomas L. James. Roscoe Conkling.

This paper was presen tad to th* President by Mr. James on Monday, the 23th day of March. Knowing the frequency with which every one of the twenty Presidents of the republic had withdrawn nominations on less serious representations, and the similar and marked practice of the present incumbent, we did not apprehend that such a suggestion would be an intrusion or an invasion of any prerogative of the nominating power. We were dieappointed. Immediately the public press, especially in articles and dispatches written by those in close and constant association with the President and with influential members of his Cabinet, teemed with violent denunciation* of the Senators from New York for “opposing toe administration ” and dictating to the President. Persons who visited the Executive Mansion reported th* President a* resentful and impatient of th* hesitation of the Senate to “ advise and consent ” to what he proposed. We had made no assault upon anybody. Ws have at all times refused to answer questions from rep esentatives of the press, or make complaint or comment or even denial of many truthless charges published sgainst us by officious champions of the administration. Indeed, beyond confidential consultations with brother Senators and officials, we hrve said nothing until now upon this subject Nor have we or either of u* “ promoted the deadlock in the Senate ” in order to prevent or influence action on any nomination; nor have we ever so stated. Immediately after the nominations were published letters and telegrams in great numbers came from every part of the State, from its leading citizens, protesting sgainst the proposed changes, and condemning them on many grounds. Several thousands of th* leading mercantile firm* of New York, constituting, as w* are informed, a majority of every branch of trade, sent us remonstrances ; sixty of the eighty-one Republican members of the Assembly, by letter or memorial, made objection. Represented ves in Congress, State officials, business men, professional men, commercial, industrial and political organizations are among the remonstrants, and they speak from every section of the State.

Beside the nominations already referred to, there were awaiting the action of the Senate several citlz ens of New York named for offices connected with the courts (District Attorneys and Marshals). Most of them had been originally commissioned by Mr. Hayes. They were certified by Judges of courts and many other eminent persons, wbo attested tile faithfulness and merit of their services, and recommended their continuance. They were not presented by us. We have not attempted to dictate, nor have we asked the nomination of one person to any office in the State. Indeed, with the sole exception of the written request set forth above, we have never even expressed an opinion to the President, in any case, unless questioned in regard to it. Some days ago, the President abruptly withdrew, in one and the same act, the names of Gen. Woodford and Mr. Tenney, and of two Marshals. This unprecedented proceeding, whether permissible by law or not, was gravely significant The President had nominated these officers after they had been weighed in the balance. Their official records were before him, and bad been fully scrutinized and approved. It must be presumed that he thought the nominations fit to be made, and that it was bis duty to make them. There is no allegation that he discovered any unfitness in them afterward. It could hardly be that he had discovered unfitness in all of them alike. What, then, was the meaning and purpose of this peremptory step. It was immediately stated, as if by authority, and it seems to be admitted, that the purpose was to coerce the Senate or Senators, to vote as they would not vote if left free from Executive interference. The design was to control the action of the Senators touching matters committed by tho constitution to- the Senate and to the Senate exclusively.

It has been suggested in addition that, by recalling the nominations and holding thean in his own hands, the President might, in the event of the failure of another nomination, use them to compensate that failure. If it can ba supposed that all these public trusts are to be, or would in any event be, made personal perquisites to be handled and disposed of, not only to punish independence of Senatorial votes ana action, but liquidate personal obligations of any individual, however high in station, the conditions are utterly vicious and degrading, and their acceptance would compel representatives of States to fling down their oath and representative duty at the footstool of executive power. Following this sweeping and startling executive act, came ths ominous avowals that dissent or failure to “ advise and consent ’’ would be held an act of offense, exposing all Senators from whatsoever State to executive displeasure. Thus we find ourselvep confronted by the question, whether we shall surrender the plain right and sworn duty of Senators by consenting to what we believe to be vicious and hurtful, or be assigned to a position of disloyalty to the administration which we helped bring in, and the success of which we earnest'y desire, for every reason and motive which can enter into the case. Ws know no theory avowed by any party which requires such submission as is now exacted. Although party service may be fairly considered in making selections of public officers, it can hardly be maintained that the Senate is bound to remove, without cause, official incumbents merely to make places for those whom any individual, even ths President, or a member of his Cabinet, wishes to repay for being recreant to others or serviceable to him. Only about two yean ago the Senate advised Gen. Merritt to be appointed Collector of New York. It is understood that among the Senators who so advised was Mr. Windom, now head of the department whose subordinate Gen. Merritt is. Another Senator known to have given this advioe was Mr. Kirkwood, now Secretary of the Interior. It is said that, like the Postmaster General from our own State, these Cabinet officers were not taken into consultation touching the removal of SM. Merritt, but tar ta •floiai

action a* Senators 1* not the less instructive. That th* late Secretary of the Treasury and the late administration, up to its expiration, less than ten weeks ago, approved of Gen. Merritt as an officer is wall known, and it is uowhe * suggested that any citizen had petitioned for his removal, or that officio delinquency on his part is the reason of it In thi nlac* of an experienced officer, in th* midst of his term fixed by law, R Is proposed suddenly to put a man in who has had no training for the position, and who cannot be said to have any special fi'nesa for the official duties. In the Inaugural of President Garfield, delivered on th* 4th of March, stand theeowords; “Th* civil service can never be placed on a satisfactory basis until it is regulated by law For the good of the service iteeif, for the protection of tho** who are intrusted with the appropriation power, against waste of time and obstruction of public business, caused by inordinate pressure for place, and for the protection of incumbents against intrigue and wrong, I shall at the proper time ask Congress to fix the tenure of the minor office* in the several executive departments, and prescribe grounds upon which removals shall be made during th* term* for which th* incumbent* lisv* been appointed.” - How good that distinction 1* which would make .major office* a prey to intrigue and wrong, and shield minor offices from Uh* havoc, and whether the Collectorship* of the country should belong to the exposed or to the protected claas, need not be decided here. Assuming Ge*. Merritt to be an officer of average fitness and honesty, it might be reasonably argued that ail Senators should with alacrity advise his displacement for a man of obvious superiority; possibly it might be said that all should advise the selection in Gen. Merritt’s place of a man who, without suprior fltnsss, had rendered his country, or even hi* party, conspicuous and exalted service. The case in hand doe* not belong to either these classes. Th* vocation of Mr. Robertson, and his Legislative and professional experience and surroundings, do not denote superiority in the qualities, the knowledge, business habits, and familiarity with revenue, the laws and system ot the United States which might make him more competent tha* Gen. Merritt to collect the vast revenues, and administer the vast business pertaining to tho port of New York. Certainly he cannot in this respect he held an exception to the rule of right and consistency, on which the constitution and the Jaw* have placed the public service. We know of no persons! or political service rendered by Mr. Robertson so tramcendant that th* Collectorship of New York should be taken in the midst of th* term and given him as a recompense.

Mr. Roberteou is reported by the New York tine to declare that hia nomination wa» a “ reward; a “ reward ” for hia action as delegate to the Nations Convention. If Mr. Robertson, in big action, was influenced by a seme of duty, if ho voted and acted hia honest convictions, it in difficult to ace what claim he hattor any reward, not to speak of such great reward. The action of which an estimate ia thus invited is understood to be this: Mr. Robertson and sixty-nine other men accepted from the State Convention a certain trust. They sought and accci>tod the position of agents or delegates to the National Convention to administer this trust. The State Convention declared plainly the stat, ed judgment and policy to be observed and supported by those it commissioned. To this declaration ail tbo-e selected as delegates gave an implied consent. But several of them, in addition, made most specific personal pledges and engagements to exert themselves in good faith throughout to secure the nomination of Gen. Grant. They made thia pledge as a means of obtaining their own appointment as de'egates, and they did, as both personally know, claim their seats in the National Convention upon the faith of their personal statements of their earnestness and fidelity. The obligation thus assumed we understood to involve the integrity as much as tlio obligation of one who receives a proxy of a stockholder in a corporation upon Ibe pledge and promise to vote as his principa won d vote. Whether Mr. Robertson was, or was not, himself bound, not only by honor and implication, but b< expressly giving h sword, becomes quite immaterial in view of the reclaim made for him. It is insisted that he “ organized the bolt ’’—this is to say that be invited, persuaded and induced others whom he knew had given their word, and bad obtained their seats by doing so, to violate their word, and betray, not only the Republicans assembled in State Convention, but the Republicans of their districts as well, who had trusted in their honor. Whoever counsels and procures another to do a dishonest or dishonorable act must share with that other the guilt, and should share also the odium justly attaching to it We are, therefore, all wholly unable, upon whatever ground we put it, to see any justification for ourselves should we become parties to using ths public trusts which belong to the people to requite such service in such modes. But the app iances employed to effect the results set new standards of responsibility and invade, as wo believe, the truths and principles on which the separate and co-ordinate branches of the Government stand. A Senator has his own responsibility. He is amenable to his State and to the body of which he is a member. He is bound by his oath to “ advise and consent ” on his conscience and judgment before God. Whatever or whoever else may constrain him, he is to be exempt from executive menace or disfavor on the one hand and executive inducement on the other. A long-standing order of the House of Commons has been the declaration that a member shall suffer expulsion who even reports the wishes of the executive head of the Government to influence votes of members. The British constitution is not more jealous than ours in this regard. To give advice, and honest, independent advice, as to appointments proposed, is as much the right and duty of a Senator as it is the right and duty of the President to propose names. Be his advice one way or other, it is no more an act of disrespect or treason to the nominating power than the verdict of a juror or the decision of a Judge. The idea that the Senate is simply to find out what is wanted and then do it we cannot believe safe or admissible. And thus far no party has dared or descended to set up such a test of party fidelity or allegiance. In this instance such prominence has been given to the object, and such disgust been expressed of the correctness of our positions that we think it right and dutiful to submit the matter to the power to which a one we are bound and over rtady to bow. The Legislature is in session. It is Republican in majority, and New York abounds in sons quite at able as we to bear her message and commission in the Senate of the United States. With a profound sense of the obligation wo owe, with devotion to the Republican party and its creed of “ Liberty and Right;” with reverent attachment to the great State whose interests and honor are dear to us, we hold it respectful and becoming to make room for those who may correct all errors wo have made, and interpret aright all duties we have misconceived. Wo therefore inclose our resignations, but hold fast the privilege as citizens and Repubieaus to stand for the constitutional rights of all men and of all representatives, whether of the States, tl-.e nation or the people. We have the honor to be, very respectfully, youi obedient servants, Roscox Conkling, Thomas O. Platt. The Associated Prers reporter, telegraphing from Washington, on the 16th inst, says of the Conkling coup dCetal:

The »urpriee was »o complete that the Senators had no time to form opinion!, and generally expreaaed conjectures and surmises. One Republican Senator said that Conkling and Platt had better bo re-elected by the New York legislature now in session, and that will be claimed as an indorsement of their opposition to Robertson at the hands of the Republican party of New York. Republicans all feel Hire of Conkling’s re-election, but some few have doubts about Platt. The Democratic Senators universal y express gratification at the resignations. They say it widens the breach in the Republican party of New York, and increases the bitterness of the stalwarts toward the administration. The Democrats now have » majority of the Senate, but, so far as can be learned, no attempt wil be made toward reforming the committees. Mr Pendleton, Chairman of the Democratic caucus, said no such setion would bo thought of, and that the committees will remain as now organised. Don Cameron and David Davis seem to be the only Senators who knew of the coming resignations. It is said that Conkling and Platt will not only regard their re-election as an approval of their fight sguinst Robertson, but also as a rebuke to the administration. The supporters of Conkling state that the resignations were offered because the New York Senat rs feel that they have been badly treated by the administration ; that Robertson’s nomination was made at the instigation of Blaine to put Conkling down ; that both the Senators and the Vico President protested against this warfare against the regular Republic m organization of New York, but all their efforts failed. Republican Senators refused to help them maintain the Republican party of the Empire State, and, rather than remain to be put down and insulted, both Senators resigned. Thia is the stroke of policy which, it has been rumored, Conkling had in view. Secretaries Blaine, Hunt, Windom, Kirkwood and Lincoln wore among the visitors at the ■« hits House to-day. The last named camo alone and made but a brief call. The othoro arrived at the Executive Mansion about the same time, and remained in conference with the President twenty minutes or more. The President stated that he had received last evening from a.trustworthy source an intimation that the resignations of the New York Senators would be announced to-day. It had, therefore, caused him no surprise. It is believed at the White House that nothing will now prevent the early adjournment of the Senate.