y adhered to the Republican party, having
secured, by a compromise, the nomination of Mr. Hayes. Apart from the
fact that Mr. Hayes was not elected, but obtained the position which he
holds through, we will say, "the accident of an accident," his
possession of the Presidency has not advanced the cause of Reform by a
hair's-breadth. We do not need to discuss his appointments or his views
or his consistency: it is sufficient to say that he has had neither the
power nor the opportunity to institute Reform, and that no President,
while other things are unchanged, _can_ have that power and opportunity.
The truth is, that there is a great confusion, both as to the object
they have to aim at and as to the means of accomplishing it, in the
minds of the Reformers. They talk and act continually as if their sole
and immediate object were to secure the appointment to office of men of
decent character and ability, and as if the election of a particular
candidate for the Presidency, or even the defeat of a particular
candidate, would afford a sufficient guarantee on this point. They are
"ready to vote for any Republican nominee but Grant," and, in case of
his nomination, to vote, we suppose, for any Democratic nominee but
Tilden--certainly for Mr. Bayard. It may be safely admitted that no
possible candidate for the Presidency enjoys a higher reputation for
probity and general fitness for the place than Mr. Bayard--one reason,
unhappily, why he is not likely to be called upon to fill it. But,
supposing him to be raised to it, what is one of the first uses he may
be expected to make of it if not to turn out the solid mass of
Republican office-holders and fill their places with Democrats? If Mr.
Hayes, with whom the Reformers have been at least partially satisfied,
had succeeded to a Democratic administration, can it be doubted that he
would have made a similar change in favor of the Republicans? Is not
every President bound by fealty to his party, consequently by a regard
for his honor and reputation, to perpetuate a system which the true aim
of Reform is to abolish?

Even if we should concede, what it is impossible to believe, that a
President personally irreproachable might be trusted to make no unfit
appointments, this would not reach the source of the evils of which we
have to complain, which lies in the _method_ by which appointments are
made and in the _tenure_ by which they are held. So long as the system
of "patronage" and "rot