ALBANY, December 25, 1884.

HON. GEORGE WILLIAM CURTIS, President, etc.:

DEAR SIR: Your communication dated December 20, addressed to me on behalf of the National Civil Service Reform League, has been received.

That a practical reform in the civil service is demanded is abundantly established by the fact that a statute, referred to in your communication, to secure such a result, has been passed in Congress with the assent of both political parties; and by the further fact that a sentiment is generally prevalent among patriotic people calling for the fair and honest enforcement of the law which has been thus enacted. I regard myself as pledged

to this, because my conception of true Democratic faith and public duty requires that this, and all other statutes, should be in good faith and without evasion enforced, and because, in many utterances made prior to my election as President, approved by the party to which I belong and which I have no disposition to disclaim, I have in effect promised the people that this should be done.

I am not unmindful of the fact which you refer, that many of our citizens fear that the recent party change in the National Executive may demonstrate that the abuses which

have grown up in the civil service are ineradicable. I know that they are deeply rooted, and that the spoils system has been supposed to be intimately related to success in the main, tenance of party organization; and I am not sure that all those who profess to be the friends of this reform will stand firmly among its advocates, when they find it obstructing their way to patronage and place.

But, fully appreciating the trust committed to my charge, no such consideration shall cause a relaxation on my part of an earnest effort to enforce this law.

There is a class of government positions which are not within the letter of the civil service statute, but which are so disconnected with the policy of an administration that the removal therefrom of present incumbents, in my opinion, should not be made during the terms for which they were appointed, solely on partisan grounds and for the purpose of putting in their places those who are in political accord with the appointing power.

But many, now holding such positions, have forfeited all just claim to retention, because they hare used their places for party purposes, in disregard of their duty to the people, and

because, instead of being decent public servants, they have proved themselves offensive partisans, and unscrupulous manipulators of local party management.

The lessons of the past should be unlearned, and such officials, as well as their successors, should be taught that efficiency, fitness, and devotion to public duty are the conditions

of their continuance in public place, and that the quiet and unobtrusive exercise of individual rights is the reasonable measure of their party service.

If I were addressing none but party friends, I should deem it entirely proper to remind them that, though the coming administration is to be Democratic, a due regard for the people's interest does not permit faithful party work to be always rewarded by appointment to office; and to say to them that while Democrats may expect all proper consideration, selections for office not embraced within the civil service rules will be based upon sufficient inquiry as to fitness, instituted by those charged with that duty, rather than upon persistent importunity or self-solicited recommendations on behalf of candidates for appointment.

Yours very truly,

GROVER CLEVELAND.