the cleveland era-第2章

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ch　could　be　said　in　favor　of　the　bill。　This　latest　assertion　of　national　authority　in　federal　elections　involved　no　new　principle。　In　legalistic　complexion　the　proposed　measure　was　of　the　same　character　as　previous　legislation　dealing　with　this　subject；　instances　of　which　are　the　Act　of　1842；　requiring　the　election　of　members　of　the　House　by　districts；　and　the　Act　of　1866；　regulating　the　election　of　United　States　Senators。　Fraudulent　returns　in　congressional　elections　have　always　been　a　notorious　evil；　and　the　partisan　way　in　which　they　are　passed　upon　is　still　a　gross　blemish　upon　the　constitutional　system　of　the　United　States；　and　one　which　is　likely　never　to　be　removed　until　the　principle　of　judicial　determination　of　electoral　contests　has　been　adopted　in　this　country　as　it　has　been　in　England。　The　truth　of　the　matter　appears　to　be　that　the　public　paid　no　attention　to　the　merits　of　the　bill。　It　was　viewed　simply　as　a　continuation　of　the　radical　reconstruction　policy；　the　practical　results　of　which　had　become　intolerable。　However　great　the　actual　evils　of　the　situation　might　be；　public　opinion　held　that　it　would　be　wiser　to　leave　them　to　be　dealt　with　by　state　authority　than　by　such　incompetent　statesmanship　as　had　been　common　in　Washington。　Moreover；　the　man　in　the　street　resented　the　indifference　of　politicians　to　all　issues　save　those　derived　from　the　Civil　War。

Viscount　Bryce　in　his　〃American　Commonwealth；〃　the　most　complete　and　penetrating　examination　of　American　political　conditions　written　during　this　period；　gives　this　account　of　the　party　situation：

〃The　great　parties　are　the　Republicans　and　the　Democrats。　What　are　their　principles；　their　distinctive　tenets；　their　tendencies？　Which　of　them　is　for　tariff　reform；　for　the　further　extension　of　civil　service　reform；　a　spirited　foreign　policy；　for　the　regulation　of　railroads　and　telegraphs　by　legislation；　for　changes　in　the　currency；　for　any　other　of　the　twenty　issues　which　one　hears　discussed　in　this　country　as　seriously　involving　its　welfare？　This　is　what　a　European　is　always　asking　of　intelligent　Republicans　and　intelligent　Democrats。　He　is　always　asking　because　he　never　gets　an　answer。　The　replies　leave　him　deeper　in　perplexity。　After　some　months　the　truth　begins　to　dawn　upon　him。　Neither　party　has；　as　a　party；　anything　definite　to　say　on　these　issues；　neither　party　has　any　clean…cut　principles；　any　distinctive　tenets。　Both　have　traditions。　Both　claim　to　have　tendencies。　Both　certainly　have　war　cries；　organizations；　interests；　enlisted　in　their　support。　But　those　interests　are　in　the　main　the　interests　of　getting　or　keeping　the　patronage　of　the　government。　Tenets　and　policies；　points　of　political　doctrine　and　points　of　political　practice　have　all　but　vanished。　They　have　not　been　thrown　away；　but　have　been　stripped　away　by　time　and　the　progress　of　events；　fulfilling　some　policies；　blotting　out　others。　All　has　been　lost；　except　office　or　the　hope　of　it。〃

That　such　a　situation　could　actually　exist　in　the　face　of　public　disapproval　is　a　demonstration　of　the　defects　of　Congress　as　an　organ　of　national　representation。　Normally；　a　representative　assembly　is　a　school　of　statesmanship　which　is　drawn　upon　for　filling　the　great　posts　of　administration。　Not　only　is　this　the　case　under　the　parliamentary　system　in　vogue　in　England；　but　it　is　equally　the　case　in　Switzerland　whose　constitution　agrees　with　that　of　the　United　States　in　forbidding　members　of　Congress　to　hold　executive　office。　But　somehow　the　American　Congress　fails　to　produce　capable　statesmen。　It　attracts　politicians　who　display　affability；　shrewdness；　dexterity；　and　eloquence；　but　who　are　lacking　in　discernment　of　public　needs　and　in　ability　to　provide　for　them；　so　that　power　and　opportunity　are　often　associated　with　gross　political　incompetency。*　The　solutions　of　the　great　political　problems　of　the　United　States　are　accomplished　by　transferring　to　Washington　men　like　Hayes　and　Cleveland　whose　political　experience　has　been　gained　in　other　fields。

*　Of　this　regrettable　fact　the　whole　history　of　emancipation　is　a　monument。　The　contrast　between　the　social　consequences　of　emancipation　in　the　West　Indies；　as　guided　by　British　statesmanship；　under　conditions　of　meager　industrial　opportunity；　and　the　social　consequences　of　emancipation　in　the　United　States；　affords　an　instructive　example　of　the　complicated　evils　which　a　nation　may　experience　through　the　sheer　incapacity　of　its　government。


The　system　of　congressional　government　was　subjected　to　some　scrutiny　in　1880…81　through　the　efforts　of　Senator　George　H。　Pendleton　of　Ohio；　an　old　statesman　who　had　returned　to　public　life　after　long　absence。　He　had　been　prominent　in　the　Democratic　party　before　the　war　and　in　1864　he　was　the　party　candidate　for　Vice…President。　In　1868　he　was　the　leading　candidate　for　the　presidential　nomination　on　a　number　of　ballots；　but　he　was　defeated。　In　1869　he　was　a　candidate　for　Governor　of　Ohio　but　was　defeated；　he　then　retired　from　public　life　until　1879　when　he　was　elected　to　the　United　States　Senate。　As　a　member　of　that　body；　he　devoted　himself　to　the　betterment　of　political　conditions。　His　efforts　in　this　direction　were　facilitated　not　only　by　his　wide　political　experience　but　also　by　the　tact　and　urbanity　of　his　manners；　which　had　gained　for　him　in　Ohio　politics　the　nickname　of　〃Gentleman　George。〃

In　agreement　with　opinions　long　previously　expressed　in　Story's　〃Commentaries；〃　Senator　Pendleton　attributed　the　inefficiency　of　national　government　to　the　sharp　separation　of　Congress　from　the　Administrationa　separation　not　required　by　the　Constitution　but　made　by　Congress　itself　and　subject　to　change　at　its　discretion。　He　proposed　to　admit　the　heads　of　executive　departments　to　participation　in　the　proceedings　of　Congress。　〃This　system；〃　said　he；　〃will　require　the　selection　of　the　strongest　men　to　be　heads　of　departments；　and　will　require　them　to　be　well　equipped　with　the　knowledge　of　their　offices。　It　will　also　require　the　strongest　men　to　be　the　leaders　of　Congress　and　participate　in　the　debate。　It　will　bring　those　strong　men　in　contact；　perhaps　into　conflict；　to　advance　the　public　weal　and　thus　stimulate　their　abilities　and　their　efforts；　and　will　thus　assuredly　result　to　the　good　of　the　country。〃*　The　reportsigned　by　such　party　leaders　as　Allison；　Blaine；　and　Ingalls　among　the　Republicans；　and　by　Pendleton　and　Voorhees　among　the　Democratsreviewed　the　history　of　relations　between　the　executive　and　legislative　branches　and　closed　with　the　expression　of　the　unanimous　belief　of　the　committee　that　the　adoption　of　the　measure　〃will　be　the　first　step　towards　a　sound　civil　service　reform；　which　will　secure　a　larger　wisdom　in　the　adoption　of　policies；　and　a　better　system　in　their　execution。〃

*　〃Senate　Report；〃　No。　837；　46th　Congress；　3d　session；　February　4；　1881。


No　action　was　taken　on　this　proposal；　notwithstanding　the　favor　with　which　it　was　regarded　by　many　close　students　of　the　political　institutions　of　the　country。　Public　opinion；　preoccupied　with　more　specific　issues；　seemed　indifferent　to　a　reform　that　aimed　simply　at　general　improvement　in　governmental　machinery。　The　legislative　calendars　are　always　so　heaped　with　projects　that　to　reach　and　act　upon　any　particular　measure　is　impossible；　except　when　there　is　brought　to　bear　such　energetic　pressure　as　to　produce　special　arrangements　for　the　purpose；　and　in　this　case　no　such　pressure　was　developed。　A　companion　measure　for　civil　service　reform　which　was　proposed　by　Senator　Pendleton　long　remained　in　a　worse　situation；　for　it　was　not　merely　left　under　the　congressional　midden　heap　but　was　deliberately　buried　by　politicians　who　were　determined　that　it　should　never　emerge。　That　it　did　emerge　is　due　to　a　tragedy　which　aroused　public　opinion　to　an　extent　that　intimidated　Congress。

Want　of　genuine　political　principles　made　factional　spirit　only　the　more　violent　and　depraved。　So　long　as　power　and　opportunity　were　based　not　upon　public　confidence　but　upon　mere　advantage　of　position；　the　contention　of　party　leaders　turned　upon　questions　of　appointment　to　office　and　the　control　of　party　machinery。　The　Republican　national　convention　of　1880　was　the　scene　of　a　factional　struggle　which　left