ANNUAL MEETING OF THE NATIONAL CIVIL-SERVICE REFORM LEAGUE. AUGUST 4, 1886. Pursuant to call duly issued, the 6th Annual Meeting of the National Civil-Service Reform League was held at Newport, R. I., on the 4th of August, 1886, in the Channing Memorial Church, which had been kindly offered for the use of the League as in former years. Seventeen associations were represented directly by delegates and members, as follows: Baltimore, Maryland: Chas. J. Bonaparte, Edwin Brevitt Boston, Massachusetts: Chas. R. Codman, John Ritchie, Brookline, Massachusetts: Theodore Lyman, Dana Estes, Cambridge, Massachusetts: W. W. Vaughan, Morrill Wy- Dedham, Massachusetts: Winslow Warren. Fifth Congressional District, Massachusetts: George G. Geneva, New York: P. Richards, A. L. Chew, Arthur P. Indiana State Association: Wm. Dudley Foulke, Arthur M. Malden, Massachusetts: Wm. B. de las Casas. Milton, Massachusetts: Edward L. Pierce. Missouri State Association: Chas. Claflin Allen. Newport, Rhode Island: Lucius D. Davis, Edmund Tweedy, Newton, Massachusetts: James P. Tolman, Henry Lambert, New York: Everett P. Wheeler, George William Curtis, Norwich, Connecticut: Wm. Appleton Aiken. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: Joseph Parrish, Thomas Leaming, Robert Adams, Jr., Herbert Welsh, R. Francis Wood, J. G. Rosengarten, Lincoln L. Eyre. A general invitation having been extended through the press as usual, at 11 A. M., a good company was assembled to listen to the address of Mr. George William Curtis, the president of the League, which was as follows: THE SITUATION. As THE earliest historic legend of the State in which we are assembled is that of the Indian greeting to Roger Williams. he coasted along the western shore of the Seekonk river at the head of the bay, he heard suddenly a greeting in his native tongue. "What cheer? Netop, what cheer ?" It was the voice of friendly Indians welcoming him to the State that he founded, and which, remembering his courage and his faith, has wisely chosen for its emblem the anchor, and for its legend, the words, "in God we hope." If now mindful of the cause which brings us to the shores of Narragansett bay, we should ask each other of Civil-Service Reform, what cheer brothers, what cheer? I, for one, should answer promptly, better and better cheer; such cheer, indeed, as no association like ours ever enjoyed at its sixth annual meeting; never were the skies so bright, never was the future so fair. I am fully aware of the other view which is vociferously urged. I read every day in some newspaper that Civil-Service Reform is now at last finally dead. But I have heard it so often and have been so constantly bidden to the obsequies, that I am very skeptical of its actual decease. It is now twenty years since that worthy son of Rhode Island, Thomas Allen Jenckes, opened in Congress the great debate for reform, and at least half a dozen times since that happy day I have heard that reform was as dead as the alien and sedition laws of the United States bank. When Congress refused the appropriation to President Grant I was sympathetically assured that the pretty bubble had burst. When President Hayes felt that his views were those of a small minority, but an exceedingly awkward squad for the party managers, and his action accordingly was very cautious, it was announced again that the humbug was exploded. When the House of Representatives in 1882 for half an hour merrily kicked and cuffed reform and cut down the appropriation which President Arthur had asked, it was evident to many delighted observers that Sundayschool politics were " played out." When a large body of Civil Service Reformers supported Mr. Cleveland for the presidency, it was angrily alleged that reform was betrayed and murdered in the house of its false friends. When inexplicable appointments, and arbitrary removals, and an apparent want of consistent adherence to principle have been pointed out under the present administration, the situation has been described as a wild saturnalia of spoils around the corpse of reform. Indeed one thing of which in many willing minds there has been no doubt ever since the reform was born, is that reform is dead. If it were so, it would certainly prove that death loves a shining mark, and he is supposed to be a sure marksman. But this time he has missed. 66 Public opinion upon this subject was never so aroused, so enlightened, and so determined. The wholesome purpose and sound reason of reform were never so generally and so clearly perceived, and it was never so plainly a pressing public question. |