1 ENERAL GRANT, after his visit to the King of Siam, returned to Singapore, in the hopes of finding the "Richmond." We reached Singapore on the evening of the 22d of April. A dispatch was awaiting us from Captain Benham, to the effect that he hoped to be in Singapore on the 28th. But General Grant had made his visit, and not wishing to trespass further on the hospitalities of Colonel Enson, the Acting Governor of the Straits Settlements, resolved to continue on, by a French steamer then in port, to Hong-Kong. So, early on the morning of the 23d of April, in a heavy, pouring rain, without having time to go ashore and pay our respects to our kind friends Colonel Enson and Secretary Smith, we pushed out to sea. Our vessel was the "Irrawaddy," commanded by Captain Gauvain, a good type of the 4 French sailor and gentleman. After having been cramped up in coasting yachts, doomed to our own society, and yearning for ice, it was pleasant to be able to sweep along the broad decks of an ocean steamer, to be again a part of the world, to enter into the gossip of the ship, to unravel the mysteries of our fellow-passengers, to find out people, to discover that this was a bride and the other a duke, to meet the singing person, and the young lady with an album, and the young gentleman who had never been to sea before, and believes everything that is told him, and the idle, wicked young men who tell him everything about whales obstructing the ship's course, about tigers springing on the deck from the Saigon Hills, and the terrors of Asia. Mr. Borie's satisfaction became enthusiasm when he learned there was ice on board, and ice enough to make an iceberg. So we settled down into a condition of comfort, for the sea was smooth and we were rapidly leaving the tropics for the north, and through northern latitudes for home. I take the occasion of this trip to recall again some memoranda of my conversations with General Grant. I trust the reader will pardon any intrusion in my narrative of mere matters of talk, because most of our talk was in the idle hours of sea-travel. I note especially one conversation on home politics, particularly on the point so much discussed at home, as to the honesty of men in our public life. "Men in public life," said the General, "are like men in other spheres of life. It would be very hard for me to say that I knew six men in public position that I know to be dishonest of absolute moral certainty. Men will do things who are senators or members that reformers call corrupt. They will ask for patronage, and govern themselves in their dealings with the administration by their success in the matter of patronage. This is a custom, and if the reformer's theory is correct, it is corruption. And yet the men who were reformers, who turned their eyes at the sins of others, I generally found as anxious for patronage as others. Mr. Sumner, for instance, who is the idol of the reformers, was among the first senators to ask offices for his friends. He expected offices as a right. Of course he spoke as a senator. He had no consideration except as a senator. If he had been a private man in Boston he would never have named a minister to London. As our public men go, as our forms of government go, Mr. Sumner and other senators were perfectly honest. There was no corruption in his asking me to appoint this man and the other. They regarded executive appointments for their friends as the rewards of public life. Mr. Edmunds asked me to keep Marsh in Italy. The whole Vermont delegation joined in the request. Yet no senator was more independent than Edmunds, more ready to oppose the admin tions for patronage. members depend upon politics for success, there will be applica You cannot call it corruption-it is a condition of our representative form of government—and yet if you read the newspapers, and hear the stories of the reformers, you will be told that any asking for place is corruption. My experience of men makes me very charitable in my criticism of public officers. I think our government is honestly and economically managed, that our civil service is as good as any in the world that I have seen, and the men in office are. men who, as a rule, do their best for the country and the government. There is no man in the country," continued the General, "so anxious for civil service reform as the President of the United States for the time being. He is the one per One rea son most interested. Patronage is the bane of the Presidential office. A large share of the vexations and cares of the Executive come from patronage. He is necessarily a civil service reformer, because he wants peace of mind. Even apart from this, I was anxious when I became President to have a civil service reform broad enough to include all that its most earnest friends desired. I gave it an honest and fair trial, although George William Curtis thinks I did not. son, perhaps, for Mr. Curtis's opinion may be that he does not know as much about the facts as I do. There is a good deal of cant about civil service reform, which throws doubt upon the sincerity of the movement. The impression is given by the advocates of civil service reform that most of the executive appointments are made out of the penitentiary. Writers who have reached years of discretion, like John Jay, gravely assert that one-fourth of the revenue collected at the New York Custom House is lost in process of collection. Of course, no reform can be sound when it is sustained by such wild and astounding declarations. Then many of those who talk civil service reform in public are the most persistent in seeking offices for their friends. Civil service reform rests entirely with Congress. If members and senators will give up claiming patronage, that will be a step gained. But there is an immense amount of human nature in members of Congress, and it is in human nature to seek power and use it and to help friends. An Executive must consider Congress. A government machine must run, and an Executive depends on Congress. The members have their rights as well as himself. he wants to get along with Congress, have the government go smoothly, and secure wholesome legislation, he must be in sympathy with Congress. It has become the habit of Congressmen to share with the Executive in the responsibility of appointments. It is unjust to say that this habit is necessarily corrupt. It is simply a custom that has grown up, a fact that cannot be ignored. The President very rarely appoints, he merely registers the appointments of members of Congress. In a country as vast as ours the advice of Con If a I gressmen as to persons to be appointed is useful, and generally for the best interests of the country. The long continuance of the Republican party in power really assures us a civil service reform. Mr: Hayes's Mr: Hayes's administration will close the twentieth year of Republican rule. These twenty years have built up large body of experienced servants in all departments of the government. The only break was when Mr. Johnson was at enmity with his party, and filled many offices with incompetent men. I suffered from that. Most of my early removals and appointments were to weed out the bad men appointed by Johnson. Mr. Hayes has had no such trouble. I made some removals in the beginning that I should not have done, by the mere exercise of the executive power, without adequate reason. But as soon as I came to know the politicians this ceased. was always resisting this pressure from Congressmen, and I could recall many cases where nothing but resistance, my own. determined resistance, saved good men. Take, for instance, General Andrews, former Minister to Sweden. General Andrews made an admirable minister, with a brilliant record. When I was in Sweden the king told me that he had been the best minister we had ever sent there. His record confirmed this. Pressure came to remove him, even from men who had asked his original appointment. He had been away, he was out of politics, a new man would help the party in Minnesota, and so on. I did not think the Republican party in Minnesota required much help, and I said that I did not see how, in the face of his record, I could fail to recommission General Andrews. If it had been my first term I could not have stood the pressure. These two incidents occur to me as showing how Congressional influence gave us so good a man as Marsh, and took away so good a man as Andrews. They illustrate my meaning when I say that the Executive does not appoint, but register appointments. Moreover, the Republican party has never been proscriptive. Mr. Lincoln had to make many removals and appointments, but this came from the Secession movement. Mr. Lincoln was always glad to recognize loyal Democrats, and in all the departments in Washington a loyal |