Democratic Sentinel, Volume 5, Number 28, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 19 August 1881 — More Democratic—Less Monarchical. [ARTICLE]

More Democratic— Less Monarchical.

So-called Republican journals assert that the true way to reform our Government is to make it less democratic. They propose to get rid of what they are pleased to call the “ spoils system,” by introducing a permanent civil service. They would give the President a body guard, aud make assaults upon his person treason. They would hold him responsible only through his ministers, and they would restrict the liberty of criticism. Tn short, as Hamilton expressed it, they would “go into the British form.” Our constitution requires no such tinkering. It needs only an honest administration, faithful to the spirit and true to the letter. A good President, more devoted to country than to party, or even more devoted to party than to faction, would speedily set to rights all that is amiss. He has law enough ready made on the statute book to institute every desirable reform. Jefferson, coming into place after a high carnival of years, found no difficulty whatever in reducing the Government to perfect simplicity, economy and efficiency, without any special legislation, until he came to the army, when Congress granted all he asked. If we are to have any changes, let them be in the direction of democracy instead of monarchy. Let us give the people more voice, and no' less, in the management of their own affairs. Mr. Henry Clay Dean, of lowa, insists that the only way to eliminate the evils complained of is to make every officer of the Federal Government, except heads of departments, from President down to Postmaster, elective, and so responsible directly to the people. He would include the judiciary and the Senate. The latter he declares is now a mere refuge for the tools of corruption, and the former has been prostituted to party and to corporate power until it has well nigh lost public respect. What chance under this system would Laphapi tuid Miller have had

of an election to the Senate, or Joe Btadley and Stanley Matthews to seats on the Supreme bench ? We commend these views of Mr. Dean to professional reformers. It is cnnous that all their proposed innovations are against the people. As this one moves in an opposite direction it may be worthy of consideration.— New York Sun.