Jasper Republican, Volume 1, Number 30, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 9 April 1875 — Some Appointments. [ARTICLE]

Some Appointments.

D. W. Bartlett, the Washington correspondent of the N. Y. Independent , speaking of some recent appointments which the President has made, among whom are perhaps half a score of members of congress, says with a sneer: “When the country rejects a man for its service, the President must provide for him in some way!" The sneer is unjust both to the President and to the men whom he has ap. pointed. This correspondent has,during the last two years fallen into the prevalent style of journalism, and especially of the Washington correspondents* whose principle of action seems to be, as it has been capitally described by Prof. Sumner of Yale college, “to throw mud on a man anyway, and if it don’t belong to him, he can scrape it off." To a private citizen it looks as though the mud is thrown in this case just from pure love of throwing it. Out of about 120 retiring members of congress, certainly half a dozen is not a very large proportion to be appointed to official position, and we cannot see any ground of objecttion to it, unless it be shown that the appointees are unfit for the places to which they have been appointed. We have seen no attempt to do this, and none will be made, for it would be difficult to find men better qualified for the places to which they have been appointed than those few ex-members who have received appoint, ments. To intimate that they have been “rejected” by the country is simply a calumny in nearly every one of these instances. Let us commence with Judge Orth, of this State, who is appointed Minister to Austria. Has he been “rejected” by the people? The last time he came before the people he was elected ; hut beiDg congress-xnan-at-large, he declined to be a candidate again, inasmuch as his residence yras in the same district with Judge Cason, who was the representative of the district, and a candidate for re-election. There could have been no “rejection" in Orth’s case for no op-

portunity for “rejection” was given. The osm of James N. Tyner is shniripe fruit, when he arose in the convention and declined the proffered boner. Had be taken the nomination, be would have been triumphantly re-elected. .He is now 2nd assistant postmaster general, and no better appointment could have been made. The man who writes of such as he and Orth that they were “rejected” by the courifry, and that hence" the President “must provide for them,” only dis* graces himself. They were appointed simply because they were the most suitable men that could be found for the places. Horace Mayund is appointed Miuisier to Turkey, and although he was a candidate for an office in Tennessee for which he was defeated yet it was only because the State was largely Democratic. He was not “rejected ’ by his party, and if a defoatfiHh&e the entire victory is with the Democrats, is it to be considered a “rejection" in the sense of precluding an appointment to office, then no Republican should have been appointed after last Fall’s elections. This is also the case of Judge Isaac C. Parker, of Missouri, who is appointed Judge of the western district of Arkansas, a most excellent appointment. He was candidate last Fall, but fell with bis party, the entire State having gone Democratic. Judge David P. Lowe, of Kansas, has been appointed Chief Justice of Utah, and it would have been difficult to find a better man. In the 43d congress he represented the whole State of Kansas; under the new census the State became entitled to three representatives, and all of them were elected at large, Judge Lowe being one of them, for the 43d congress. Then the State was districted, and Lowe, finding himself in the same district with Rspresentative Cobb, declined to be a candidate. If he had been, he would certainly have been elected. Bnt how unjust it is to say of him that he was rejected! We need not pursue the subject ftirther. We could go through the entire list, and substantially the same state of facts would 4ipoear. The sneer of the correspondent of the Independent conveys an implication which bas no foundation in fact. — La Porte Chronicle.