China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative,

Africa, and the Middle East: Feats,

Freezes, and Failures 1st ed. Edition
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/chinas-maritime-silk-road-initiative-africa-and-the-mid
dle-east-feats-freezes-and-failures-1st-ed-edition-jean-marc-f-blanchard/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

China’s Globalization and the Belt and Road Initiative

1st ed. 2020 Edition Jean A. Berlie

https://ebookmass.com/product/chinas-globalization-and-the-belt-
and-road-initiative-1st-ed-2020-edition-jean-a-berlie/

A Legal Analysis of the Belt and Road Initiative:

Towards a New Silk Road? 1st ed. Edition Giuseppe
Martinico

https://ebookmass.com/product/a-legal-analysis-of-the-belt-and-
road-initiative-towards-a-new-silk-road-1st-ed-edition-giuseppe-
martinico/

Rethinking the Silk Road: China’s Belt and Road

Initiative and Emerging Eurasian Relations 1st Edition
Maximilian Mayer

https://ebookmass.com/product/rethinking-the-silk-road-chinas-
belt-and-road-initiative-and-emerging-eurasian-relations-1st-
edition-maximilian-mayer/

Stabilising the Contemporary Middle East and North

Africa: Regional Actors and New Approaches 1st ed. 2020
Edition Victor Gervais

https://ebookmass.com/product/stabilising-the-contemporary-
middle-east-and-north-africa-regional-actors-and-new-
approaches-1st-ed-2020-edition-victor-gervais/
The Silk Road: Connecting Histories and Futures Tim
Winter

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-silk-road-connecting-histories-
and-futures-tim-winter/

The Red Star and the Crescent: China and the Middle
East James Reardon-Anderson

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-red-star-and-the-crescent-
china-and-the-middle-east-james-reardon-anderson/

Eurasia’s Maritime Rise and Global Security 1st ed.

Edition Geoffrey F. Gresh

https://ebookmass.com/product/eurasias-maritime-rise-and-global-
security-1st-ed-edition-geoffrey-f-gresh/

China and the Islamic World: How the New Silk Road is
Transforming Global Politics Robert Bianchi

https://ebookmass.com/product/china-and-the-islamic-world-how-
the-new-silk-road-is-transforming-global-politics-robert-bianchi/

Bernard Shaw and the Censors: Fights and Failures,

Stage and Screen 1st ed. Edition Bernard F. Dukore

https://ebookmass.com/product/bernard-shaw-and-the-censors-
fights-and-failures-stage-and-screen-1st-ed-edition-bernard-f-
dukore/
PALGRAVE STUDIES IN
ASIA-PACIFIC POLITICAL ECONOMY

China’s Maritime Silk

Road Initiative, Africa,
and the Middle East
Feats, Freezes, and Failures

Edited by
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard
Palgrave Studies in Asia-Pacific Political Economy

Series Editor
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard
Mr. & Mrs. S.H. Wong Center
for the Study of Multinational Corporations
Los Gatos, CA, USA
School of Advanced International and Area Studies
East China Normal University
Shanghai, China
The series aims to publish works, which will be meaningful to academics,
businesspeople, and policymakers and broaden or deepen their knowl-
edge about contemporary events or significant trends, or enable them to
think in new ways about the interaction of politics and economics in the
APR. Possible candidates for the series include topics relating to foreign
direct investment, bilateral investment treaties, multinational corpora-
tions, regional economic institutions, technology policy, economic global-
ization, corporate social responsibility, economic development strategies,
and labor movements.

More information about this series at

http://www.palgrave.com/gp/series/15638
 Jean-Marc F. Blanchard
Editor

China’s Maritime Silk

Road Initiative, Africa,
and the Middle East
Feats, Freezes, and Failures
Editor
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard
Mr. & Mrs. S.H. Wong Center
for the Study of Multinational Corporations
Los Gatos, CA, USA
School of Advanced International and Area Studies
East China Normal University
Shanghai, China

Palgrave Studies in Asia-Pacific Political Economy

ISBN 978-981-33-4012-1 ISBN 978-981-33-4013-8 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4013-8

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer
Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2021
This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the
Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights
of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on
microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and
retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology
now known or hereafter developed.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc.
in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such
names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for
general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and informa-
tion in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither
the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with
respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been
made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps
and institutional affiliations.

Cover credit: owngarden

This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature
Singapore Pte Ltd.
The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore
189721, Singapore
This book is dedicated to Professors Gregory Moore, May Tan-Mullins, and
Suisheng Zhao who have been instrumental in the success of this project, the
third and final book in a widely acclaimed three-part series on China’s
Maritime Silk Road Initiative, as well as valued friends.
 Preface and Acknowledgments

In November 2017, the Mr. & Mrs. S.H. Wong Center for the Study
of Multinational Corporations (Wong MNC Center), a California-based
think tank focusing on the political economy of multinational corpora-
tions in/from East Asia, orchestrated the third in a three-part conference
series on China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative (MSRI). The conference,
which focused on the MSRI in Africa as well as the Middle East and North
Africa (MENA), was co-sponsored and hosted by East China Normal
University’s School of Advanced International and Area Studies (SAIAS)
and drew upon the expertise of analysts from mainland China, Hong
Kong, Iran, Kenya, the United Kingdom, and the United States (US) who
gathered to discuss the MSRI’s situation in Africa and MENA, the factors
affecting its implementation, and its ramifications. The 2017 event built
upon and supplemented conferences in 2016 and 2015, which contem-
plated, respectively, China’s MSRI and Southeast Asia and China’s MSRI
and South Asia. The first conference led to the publication of an edited
volume entitled China’s Maritime Silk Road and South Asia (Palgrave,
2018) while the second yielded an edited book entitled China’s Maritime
Silk Road and Southeast Asia (Palgrave, 2019).
There are many that deserve acknowledgment for their contribution to
the aforementioned conference and this book. At the institutional level, I
would like to thank East China Normal University (ECNU) and, above
all, ECNU SAIAS where I currently serve as Distinguished Professor,
for their backing of the event and this multi-year project. Beyond this,

vii
viii PREFACE AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to thank the Wong MNC Center for its critical managerial,
financial, and administrative support for this and other books in the series.
Finally, I would like to thank Mr. Jacob Dreyer (Palgrave) for his support
of this multi-year book project and the Palgrave Studies in Asia-Pacific
Political Economy series for which I serve as series editor.
In terms of individuals, Professor Liu Jun, ECNU SAIAS Dean, has
been a key supporter of the conference series and has provided impor-
tant financial and administrative resources to ensure its success. I also
would like to thank my colleagues Professor Zang Shumei and Ms. Chen
Jing who efficiently handled numerous conference matters. I would like
to express my appreciation to all the participants in the November 2017
conference, many who submitted chapters that eventually were incorpo-
rated into this book. Dr. Ding Yifan, China State Council Development
Research Center, Dr. Zhou Yunxuan (ECNU), and Professor Suisheng
Zhao deserve appreciation for taking time out of their busy schedules to
participate in the 2017 event. Special thanks are due to Dr. Ding for deliv-
ering a very informative keynote speech. Professor Gregory Moore and
Jeffrey Payne deserve special thanks for their efforts to provide feedback
on all the 2017 conference papers. Professor Zhao also warrants special
thanks for his guidance on a select number of papers that later would serve
as the basis for a special issue of the Journal of Contemporary China (enti-
tled China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative: Africa and the Middle East )
published in January 2020. Professor May Tan-Mullins deserves thanks
for her support of an event at the University of Nottingham-Ningbo,
China that facilitated the publication of the aforementioned special issue.
Finally, I would like to express my sincere appreciation to (now Dr.)
Pippa Morgan and Courtland Johnson for their extremely useful research
assistance and Ms. Xu Jing for her hard work conforming this book to
publisher style requirements.

Los Gatos, USA/Shanghai, Jean-Marc F. Blanchard

China
 Contents

China’s MSRI in Africa and the Middle East: Political

Economic Realities Continue to Shape Results
and Ramifications 1
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard

The Maritime Silk Road Initiative: Connecting Africa 53

Cliff Mboya

The Maritime Silk Road Initiative and Ethiopia:

Transforming Policies, Institutions, and Politics
in Expected and Unexpected Ways 81
Jean-Marc F. Blanchard and Edson Ziso

Djibouti and Small State Agency in the Maritime Silk

Road: The Domestic and International Foundations 111
David Styan

Tanzania in China’s MSRI: The “Chinese Dream” Awaits

Alignment with the African One 137
Conrad John Masabo

ix
x CONTENTS

Iran in China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative (MSRI):

Bounded Progress and Bounded Promise 165
Manochehr Dorraj and Jean-Marc F. Blanchard

The Missing MSRI in Iraq: The Southern Opportunity 199

Jeffrey Payne

The Gulf Cooperation Council’s “Visions” of Maritime

Silk Road Initiative Cooperation 227
Jonathan Fulton

Egypt in China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative: Relations

Cannot Surmount Realities 255
Mordechai Chaziza

Index 285
 Notes on Contributors

Jean-Marc F. Blanchard, Ph.D. is Founding Executive Director of the

Mr. & Mrs. S.H. Wong Center for the Study of Multinational Corpo-
rations and Distinguished Professor, School of Advanced International
and Area Studies, East China Normal University. He has authored, co-
authored, or co-edited almost 20 books/special academic journal issues
and more than 60 book chapters and journal articles on topics relating to
Chinese foreign economic policy, foreign investment in China, Chinese
outward investment, and China and the WTO. Prior to his career in
academia, Dr. Blanchard worked for various United States Government
banking sector regulatory agencies and Kelling, Northcross, & Nobriga.
Mordechai Chaziza, Ph.D. is Senior Lecturer with the Department of
Politics and Governance at Ashkelon Academic College (Israel), with a
specialization in Chinese foreign and strategic relations. He is the author
of China’s Middle East Diplomacy and China and the Persian Gulf and
has published numerous articles on topics ranging from China’s rela-
tions with specific Middle East countries to its policy toward the region
to China’s non-intervention policy. He earned his Ph.D. from Bar-Ilan
University.
Manochehr Dorraj, Ph.D. is Professor of Political Science, Texas Chris-
tian University (USA). He is an expert on China’s relations with the
Middle East, China and Iran, and energy. He is the author, co-author,

xi
xii NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS

editor, or co-editor of 7 books and more than 75 articles and book chap-
ters, many relating to China-Middle East, especially China–Iran ties. He
is a Senior Research Fellow with the Mr. & Mrs. S.H. Wong Center for
the Study of Multinational Corporations.
Jonathan Fulton, Ph.D. is Assistant Professor of Political Science at
Zayed University (UAE) and Nonresident Senior Fellow at the Atlantic
Council (USA). He has written widely on China–Middle East relations for
both academic and popular publications and is frequently interviewed by
international media. He is the author of China’s Relations with the Gulf
Monarchies and Regions in the Belt and Road Initiative. He received his
Ph.D. in International Relations from the University of Leicester, UK.
Conrad John Masabo is a Ph.D. Candidate in Political Theory with the
Department of Politics, East China Normal University (China) and an
Assistant Lecturer of Political Science, Department of History, Political
Science and Development Studies at Dar es Salaam University College
of Education, a Constituent College of the University of Dar es Salaam
(Tanzania). He researches Sino-Africa (Tanzania) relations. He is the
author of Regional Organizations and Sustainable Governance of Mineral
Resources in Tanzania (2016).
Cliff Mboya, Ph.D. is an independent researcher on China–Africa rela-
tions. He has experience in diplomacy and international relations
combined with Journalism. He worked at the Chinese Embassy in Kenya
as Information and Public affairs officer before starting his Ph.D. He has
published pieces in Kenyan and international media. His research interests
include China’s Public diplomacy in Africa, China’s Belt and Road Initia-
tive, and China in International institutions. He earned his Ph.D. from
Fudan University (China).
Jeffrey Payne is Research Fellow/Academic Affairs Manager with the
National Defense University’s Near East South Asia Center for Strategic
Studies (NESA) (USA). He presently serves as the NESA Center’s lead for
engagements in China. He also serves as the director of the Next Gener-
ation Seminar, an ongoing NESA program. His writings have appeared in
various peer-reviewed journals, edited volumes, and various mass market
publications such as The Diplomat, China File, and War on the Rocks.
 NOTES ON CONTRIBUTORS xiii

David Styan, Ph.D. is Lecturer with the Department of Politics, Birk-

beck College, University of London (UK). His has published exten-
sively on topics such as the MSRI and the Horn of Africa, the MSRI
and Djibouti, and French and comparative foreign policy in Africa
and the Middle East. His research interests include international polit-
ical economy, foreign policy analysis, and development. His Ph.D. was
obtained from the Department of International Relations, London School
of Economics (UK).
Edson Ziso, Ph.D. is a Visiting Research Fellow at the University of
Adelaide, South Australia. He completed his Ph.D. at the same university
and currently teaches International Political Economy at the University of
South Australia. He is the author of A Post State-Centric Analysis China-
Africa relations: Internationalization of Chinese Capital in Ethiopia. He
is interested in South-South relations, North-South relations, and Africa
in global affairs.
 List of Figures

The Maritime Silk Road Initiative: Connecting Africa

Fig. 1 China’s trade with Kenya, Ethiopia and Djibouti,
2013–2016 (Amounts in USD Billions) (Source Author’s
calculations using various sources [Sources used include
Trading Economics, “China Imports by Country,” https://
tradingeconomics.com/china/imports-by-country; Trading
Economics, “China Exports by Country,” https://tradin
geconomics.com/china/exports-by-country; China-Africa
Research Initiative, School of Advanced International
Studies, Johns Hopkins University. “Data: China-Africa
Trade,” http://www.sais-cari.org/data-china-africa-trade;
and “UN Comtrade,” https://comtrade.un.org/db/ce/ceS
earch.aspx]) 68
Fig. 2 Kenya’s trade with China, Ethiopia, and Djibouti in 2013
and 2017 (Amounts in USD Billions) (Source Author’s
calculations using various sources [Sources used include
Trading Economics, “China Imports by Country,” https://
tradingeconomics.com/china/imports-by-country; Trading
Economics, “China Exports by Country,” https://tradin
geconomics.com/china/exports-by-country; China-Africa
Research Initiative, School of Advanced International
Studies, Johns Hopkins University. “Data: China-Africa
Trade,” http://www.sais-cari.org/data-china-africa-trade;
and “UN Comtrade,” https://comtrade.un.org/db/ce/ceS
earch.aspx]) 69

xv
xvi LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 3 Ethiopia’s trade with China, Kenya, and Djibouti,

2013–2016 (Amounts in USD Billions) (Source Author’s
calculations using various sources [Sources used include
Trading Economics, “China Imports by Country,” https://
tradingeconomics.com/china/imports-by-country; Trading
Economics, “China Exports by Country,” https://tradin
geconomics.com/china/exports-by-country; China-Africa
Research Initiative, School of Advanced International
Studies, Johns Hopkins University. “Data: China-Africa
Trade,” http://www.sais-cari.org/data-china-africa-trade;
and “UN Comtrade,” https://comtrade.un.org/db/ce/ceS
earch.aspx]) 70

Tanzania in China’s MSRI: The “Chinese Dream” Awaits

Alignment with the African One
Fig. 1 Tanzania-Chinese general trade volume, 2008–2018
(amounts in USD $millions) (Source Author’s compilation
from various sources [Tanzania Revenue Authority (TRA),
https://www.tra.go.tz/index.php/113-statistics/94-trade-
statistics; The United Republic of Tanzania, Ministry of
Finance and Planning (MoFP), https://www.mof.go.tz/
index.php; Tanzanian National Bureau of Statistics (NBS),
https://www.nbs.go.tz/index.php/sw/machapisho/pato-
la-taifa; and Ministry of Industry and Trade (MIT),
“Speeches,” https://www.mit.go.tz/speeches]) 142
Fig. 2 Sectoral distribution of COFDI in Tanzania, 2007–2018
(Source AEI CGIT) 143

The Missing MSRI in Iraq: The Southern Opportunity

Fig. 1 Distribution of ethnoreligious groups and major tribes in
Iraq (Source US Central Intelligence Agency, 1992) 204
Map 1 Key Iraqi energy resources and port facilities (Source
Base Map—Central Intelligence Agency, 1996; Map
Icons—Author Generated) 209
 List of Tables

The Maritime Silk Road Initiative: Connecting Africa

Table 1 List of African MSRI Participants 54
Table 2 Connectivity Projects in Kenya, Ethiopia, and Djibouti 58

The Maritime Silk Road Initiative and Ethiopia:

Transforming Policies, Institutions, and Politics in
Expected and Unexpected Ways
Table 1 Ethiopia’s Trade with China, 2001–2018 (amounts in
USD millions) 86
Table 2 COFDI in Ethiopia, 2010–2018 (amounts in USD millions) 87

Tanzania in China’s MSRI: The “Chinese Dream” Awaits

Alignment with the African One
Table 1 China’s engagement in infrastructure development in East
Africa 144

Iran in China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative (MSRI):

Bounded Progress and Bounded Promise
Table 1 Iran’s oil exports to China and the World, 2000–2018
(select years) (amounts in United States/USD millions) 169
Table 2 Iran’s natural gas exports to China and the World,
2000–2018 (select years) (amounts in USD millions) 170

xvii
xviii LIST OF TABLES

Table 3 Global oil reserves-top five countries as of 2018 171

Table 4 List of World’s major natural gas producers, 2015–2018
(amounts in millions of tons oil equivalent) 171
Table 5 Iran–China trade, 2010–2018 (amounts in USD millions) 172
Table 6 Chinese OFDI in Iran (amounts in USD millions) 173
Table 7 Chinese contracting projects in Iran, 2005–2013 (amounts
in USD millions) 175

The Missing MSRI in Iraq: The Southern Opportunity

Table 1 Major Chinese arms sales in the 1980s 202
Table 2 Iraq oil and gas reserves vs. select other energy rich nations
(as of the end of 2018) 205
Table 3 Iraq exports to and imports from China, 2005–2018
(select years) (all amounts in USD millions) 206
Table 4 Iraq’s contracts with and FDI from China, 2005–2013
(amounts in USD millions) 207

The Gulf Cooperation Council’s “Visions” of Maritime

Silk Road Initiative Cooperation
Table 1 China–GCC trade, 2005–2017 (amounts in USD millions) 231
Table 2 Contracting and COFDI in GCF states, 2005–2017 (all
amounts in USD millions) 234

Egypt in China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative: Relations

Cannot Surmount Realities
Table 1 Egypt-China Trade, FOB, 2005–2018 (select years)
(Amounts in USD Millions) 262
 China’s MSRI in Africa and the Middle East:
Political Economic Realities Continue
to Shape Results and Ramifications

Jean-Marc F. Blanchard

Introduction
According to one observer, the People’s Republic of China
(PRC/China)’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative (MSRI), one of two
components of its larger Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), is “All about
Africa.”1 Another analyst asserts, more ominously, that the MSRI in
Africa is an integral part of a Chinese attempt to build a new Sinocentric
system and consolidate China’s position as a global superpower.2 Looking
northward, the Middle East and North Africa (MENA), which is the
“physical heart of the BRI” will “play a decisive role in the building of”
China’s ambitious venture.3 Similar to the case of Africa, China’s aims
to exploit its initiative in MENA to “expand its reach and influence”

The author wishes to thank Courtland Johnson for his invaluable research
assistance and Xu Jing for her help conforming this chapter to Palgrave style
requirements.

J.-M. F. Blanchard (B)

Mr. & Mrs. S.H. Wong Center for the Study of Multinational Corporations,
Los Gatos, CA, USA
e-mail: executive_director@mnccenter.org

© The Author(s) 2021 1

J.-M. F. Blanchard (ed.), China’s Maritime Silk Road Initiative, Africa,
and the Middle East, Palgrave Studies in Asia-Pacific Political Economy,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-33-4013-8_1
2 J.-M. F. BLANCHARD

and reshape the “economic balance.”4 Aside from the issues raised above
about China’s true motivations, the relevance of Africa and MENA to
the MSRI and its cousin the Silk Road Economic Belt (SREB), and
the geopolitical impact of China’s scheme, two other critical empirical
questions are what is the actual progress of the MSRI and what are the
net benefits of MSRI projects. After all, it is hard to envision the MSRI
transforming country behaviors and regional orders (much less the global
one), if projects are not completed and/or fail to deliver the desired
outcomes.
The existing literature has a limited ability to shed light on these issues
partly because it is relatively scant.5 This defect, however, is not the
biggest one. One noteworthy issue is the tendency to analyze the entire
BRI, rather than to research just the MSRI or the SREB.6 A second is the
failure to delve into a specific region or country, problematic given the
experiences of individual countries can be quite heterogeneous.7 A third
is that analyses of the MSRI and SREB in Africa and MENA that stress an
individual country often deliver a review of the relevant country’s overall
ties with China instead of a genuine MSRI study. A fourth is the tendency
to equate headlines, official communiqués, or Memoranda of Under-
standing (MoU) with concrete action or outcomes. A fifth is the dearth
of systematic studies of the net benefits of MSRI projects. A sixth is the
failure to unpack carefully the factors driving host country domestic and
foreign policy decisions, which too often are associated exclusively with
the economic stimuli flowing from the MSRI or a participant country’s
broader economic ties with China. To address some of these issues, this
book concentrates solely on the MSRI and, beyond this, select countries
within the Africa and MENA regions. In addition, contributors empha-
size analysis of the MSRI. Furthermore, chapter writers evaluating the
drivers of particular country’s policies contemplate multiple factors, not
just economic ones.8
Some question the payoff of exploring the MSRI in Africa and MENA.
One set of scholars asserted, “Africa’s inclusion in the Belt and Road
Initiative is minute.”9 A MENA specialist wondered about the wisdom
of academics “dancing to the Chinese tune,” devoting so much time
studying something so vague.”10 While these points are well taken,
Africa deserves attention because of China’s significant presence there,
the prominence given to the MSRI and SREB in Africa-Chinese insti-
tutions such as the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC), and
the existence of major MSRI projects in many African countries. MENA
 CHINA’S MSRI IN AFRICA AND THE MIDDLE EAST … 3

warrants attention because it is central in global energy affairs, strategi-

cally located, and becoming China’s “most important region” outside the
Asia-Pacific Region (APR).11 Aside from this, individual MENA MSRI
countries such as Iran significantly influence regional and global polit-
ical and security dynamics. From a conceptual standpoint, study of the
MSRI in Africa and MENA can enhance our knowledge of how politics
and economics interact to shape participant country attitudes towards
the MSRI, its implementation, and its political and economic effects.
The business case for studying the MSRI in Africa and MENA is to
develop a richer understanding of the non-market environment as well as
the business opportunities (or not) flowing from MSRI as well as SREB
projects.
This book offers several findings. First, the MSRI appears to have
advanced more in Africa than MENA and major land projects (e.g., rail-
ways) seem to have progressed more than maritime ones. Second, the
MSRI is far from being realized, with some projects canceled (e.g., in
Tanzania), nonexistent (e.g., Iraq), and many in-progress (e.g., Kenya,
Ethiopia, Egypt, Gulf Cooperation Council/GCC states, and Iran).
Third, as shown by case studies of Egypt, Iraq, and Tanzania, history,
good relations, and/or economic need do not ensure MSRI project
implementation. Fourth, the MSRI is promoting connectivity, but this
connectivity may not be “win-win,” but asymmetric or negative. Fifth, the
economic attractions of the MSRI and broader economic links with China
do not suffice to explain the stance countries such as Djibouti, Egypt,
Ethiopia, GCC states, Iran, and Tanzania have taken toward the MSRI,
China, or China-favored positions such as the “One China policy.” Also
relevant are the domestic political needs and national interest perceptions
of leaders, internal security imperatives, development ideologies, external
security threats, China’s interests and situation, and the availability (or
not) of appealing alternatives such as international financial institutions
(IFIs) or the United States (US).12
The next (second) section of this chapter supplies background on
the MSRI in its entirety. The third gives an overview of Africa-China
and MENA-China ties and their drivers from 1949 through the present,
focusing on the period prior to the birth of the MSRI in 2013. The
fourth turns to examining the MSRI in Africa before providing an in-
depth treatment of the MSRI in MENA. Among other themes, the fourth
section reflects on China’s objectives as well as the goals of MSRI partic-
ipants in Africa and MENA. It also identifies some of the issues—e.g.,
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
degraded, and that the true prescription to elevate, reform, and
purify the public service is to prevent the clerks from being removed
out of their places in the Departments. This brotherhood has not
been hitherto very largely re-enforced from the Democracy. If there
has been an original civil-service reformer who has deserted from the
ranks of the Democracy, history does not record his name. It has
been left to the party to which I belong to afford conspicuous and
shining illustrations of that class of political thinkers who are never
quite sure that they are supporting a party unless they are reviling
the candidates and denouncing its platform, who are not positive
that they are standing erect unless they are leaning over backward,
and whose idea of reforming the organization in which they profess
to be classified is to combine with its adversaries and vote for
candidates who openly spurn their professions and depreciate the
stock in trade which they denominate their principles. Standing on
the corners of the streets, enlarging the borders of their phylacteries,
they loudly advertise their perfections, thanking God that they are
not as other men, even these Republicans and Democrats; they
traffic with both to ascertain which they can most profitably betray.
Mr. President, the neuter gender is not popular either in nature or
society. “Male and female created He them.” But there is a third sex,
if that can sex be called which sex has none, resulting sometimes
from a cruel caprice of nature, at others from accident or malevolent
design, possessing the vices of both and the virtues of neither;
effeminate without being masculine or feminine; unable either to
beget or to bear; possessing neither fecundity nor virility; endowed
with the contempt of men and the derision of women, and doomed to
sterility, isolation, and extinction. But they have two recognized
functions. They sing falsetto, and they are usually selected as the
guardians of the seraglios of Oriental despots.
And thus to pass from the illustration to the fact, these political
epicenes, without pride of ancestry or hope of posterity, chant in
shrill falsetto their songs of praise of non-partisanship and civil-
service reform, and apparently have been selected as the harmless
custodians of the conscience of the national Executive.
Sir, I am not disposed to impugn the good faith, the patriotism, the
sincerity, the many unusual traits and faculties of the President of
the United States. He is the sphinx of American politics. It is said
that he is a fatalist; that he regards himself as the child of fate—the
man of destiny; and that he places devout and implicit reliance upon
the guiding influence of his star. Certainly, whether he be a very
great man or a very small man, he is a very extraordinary man. His
career forbids any other conclusion.
The Democratic party was not wanting when its convention
assembled at Chicago in many renowned and illustrious characters;
men who had led the forlorn hope in its darkest and most desperate
days; men for whose character and achievements, for whose fame
and history, not only that organization but the country had the
profoundest admiration and respect. There was Thurman, and
Bayard, and Hendricks, and Tilden, and McDonald, and others
perhaps not less worthy and hardly less illustrious, upon whom the
mantle of that great distinction might have fallen; but the man at the
mature age of thirty-five abandoned a liberal and honored profession
to become the sheriff of Erie, without known opinions and destitute
of experience or training in public affairs, outstripped them all in the
race of ambition; and when but little more than a year ago he entered
this Chamber as the President elect of the United States, he
encountered the curious scrutiny of an audience to whom he was a
stranger in feature as in fame; a stranger to the leaders of his own
party as well as to the representatives of all the nations of the earth
who had assembled to witness the gorgeous pageant of his
inauguration.
Sir, the career of Napoleon was sudden, startling, and dramatic.
There have been many soldiers of fortune who have sprung at one
bound from obscurity to fame, but no illustration of the caprices of
destiny so brilliant and bewildering is recorded in history as the
elevation of Grover Cleveland to the Chief Magistracy of sixty
millions of people.
If when he was inaugurated he had determined that the functions
of Government should be exercised by officers selected from his own
party the nation would have been content; but he did not so
determine, and herein and hereon is founded the justification that
the majority of the Senate can satisfactorily use and employ in
demanding that no action shall be had in connection with these
suspensions from office until there has been satisfactory assurances
that injustice has not been done. If it were understood that these
suspensions and removals were made for political reasons the
country would be content, the Republican majority in the Senate
would be content. But what is the attitude? Ever since his
inauguration and for many months before, by many utterances,
official and private, in repeated declarations never challenged, Mr.
Cleveland announced that he would not so administer this
Government. At the very outset, in his letter of acceptance, he
denounced the doctrine of partisan changes in the patronage, and
through all of his political manifestoes down to the present time he
has repeated these assurances with emphatic and unchanging
monotony.
He has declared that there should be no changes in office, where
the incumbents were competent and qualified, for political reasons,
but that they should be permitted to serve their terms. Like those
who were grinding at the mill, one has been taken and another has
been left. Some Republicans have been suspended and others have
been retained. What is the irresistible inference? What is the logic of
the events, except that, in view of what the President has declared,
every man who is suspended is suspended for cause, and not for
political reasons? It is not possible to suspect the President of
duplicity and treacherous deception.
For the purpose of illustration, let me call the attention of the
Senate and through the Senate the attention of the country, which is
to judge of this matter, to the basis on which this inquiry proceeds. I
read from the letter of Grover Cleveland, dated Albany, August 19,
1884, accepting the nomination for the Presidency of the United
States. He says:
The people pay the wages of the public employés, and they are entitled to the fair
and honest work which the money thus paid should command. It is the duty of
those intrusted with the management of their affairs to see that such public service
is forthcoming. The selection and retention of subordinates in Government
employment should depend upon their ascertained fitness and the value of their
work, and they should be neither expected nor allowed to do questionable party
service.
There is another utterance in this document to which I might
properly allude further on, but which appears to me to be so
significant that I will read it now. It has a singular fitness in
connection with this subject that we have been discussing. Speaking
of honest administration, he says,
 I believe that the public temper is such that the voters of the land are prepared to
support the party which gives the best promise of administering the Government
in the honest, simple, and plain manner which is consistent with its character and
purposes.
And now:
They have learned that mystery and concealment in the management of their
affairs cover tricks and betrayal.
Yes, they have learned that mystery in the administration of the
patronage of the Government, by the concealment from the people of
the documents and papers that bear upon the character and conduct
of officials suspended and those that are appointed, cover tricks and
betrayal. “I thank thee for that word.” A “Daniel” has “come to
judgment.” No more pertinent and pungent commentary upon the
facts of the present situation could be formulated than that which
Grover Cleveland uttered before his foot was upon the threshold, that
mystery and concealment in the management of the affairs of the
people covered tricks and betrayal. There are tricks and somebody
has been betrayed.
Again, on the 20th day of December, 1884, after the election, some
of the contingent of Republican deserters who elected Mr. Cleveland
to the Presidency, becoming apprehensive that there might be
trouble about their thirty pieces of silver, formulated their
uneasiness in words and addressed him a letter calling his attention
to the professions upon which he had been elected and demanding
further guarantee. To that letter, on the 25th day of December, 1884,
Mr. Cleveland replied, and from that reply I select certain
paragraphs, not being willing to tax the patience of the Senate or
waste my own strength in reading what is not strictly material.
I regard myself pledged to this—
That is, to this practical reform in the civil service, this refusal to
turn out competent and qualified officials and put in Democrats—
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.
Not his party, but the people, Republican as well as Democrats.
Then he proceeds to castigate the Democratic party:
 I am not unmindful of the fact to 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 maintenance 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.
He goes on thus, and this is a most significant promise and pledge:
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—
And then follows that celebrated definition which lifted the lid
from the box of Pandora—
but many men holding such positions have forfeited all just claim to retention
because they have 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 letter closes with this somewhat frigid assurance of
consolation to the Democratic party.
If I were addressing none but party friends, I should deem it entirely proper to
remind them—
That is, party friends—
that though the coming administration is to be Democratic—
Strictly 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 a 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.
“Here endeth the first lesson!” This was in the year 1884. I now
come to the declaration of 1885. Just as the Democratic State
convention which nominated the present governor of New York for
the position that he now holds, was about to assemble at Saratoga on
the 24th, I think, of September, the President gave out for
publication the letter of resignation of Dorman B. Eaton, a civil-
service commissioner, which was dated July 28, 1885, and
accompanied it with a letter of his own accepting that resignation
which was dated September 11, 1885. It was alleged in Democratic
newspapers that the President held back these letters in order to give
publicity to his reply at that time for effect upon the convention, and
it was remarked that it had caused a panic among the Democracy.
His letter is dated, as I said, September 11, 1885, and I will read a few
paragraphs showing his opinion of the Democratic party and the
course that they had pursued in attempting to force him off the civil-
service reform platform. After some rather glittering platitudes in
regard to the work accomplished by Mr. Eaton, he proceeds:
A reasonable toleration for old prejudices, a graceful recognition of every aid, a
sensible utilization of every instrumentality that promises assistance and a
constant effort to demonstrate the advantages of the new order of things, are the
means by which this reform movement will in the future be further advanced, the
opposition.
Now, this is an epithet to which I desire to call particular attention
—
The opposition of incorrigible spoilsmen rendered ineffectual and the cause
placed upon a sure foundation.
But not content with applying his scourge to the “incorrigible
spoilsmen” of the Democratic party, the President took occasion to
express his opinion in rather picturesque language of another class of
politicians that had somewhat afflicted him, and to whom he was
under bonds:
It is a source of congratulation that there are so many friends of civil-service
reform marshaled on the practical side of the question; and that the number is not
greater of those who profess friendliness for the cause, and yet, mischievously and
with supercilious self-righteousness, discredit every effort not in exact accord with
their attenuated ideas, decry with carping criticism the labor of those actually in
the field of reform, and ignoring the conditions which bound and qualify every
struggle for a radical improvement in the affairs of government, demand complete
and immediate perfection.
“Supercilious self-righteousness, attenuated ideas, and carping
criticism,” can not be regarded as complimentary phrases when
applied to the apostles of this new evangel of political reformation.
He continues—
I believe in civil-service reform and its application in the most practicable form
attainable, among other reasons, because it opens the door for the rich and the
poor alike to a participation in public place-holding. And I hope the time is at hand
when all our people will see the advantage of a reliance for such an opportunity
upon merit and fitness, instead of a dependence upon the caprice or selfish interest
of those who impudently—
To whom does he refer?—
who impudently stand between the people and the machinery of the
Government.
You will agree with me, I think, that the support which has been given to the
present administration in its efforts to preserve and advance this reform by a party
restored to power after an exclusion for many years from participation in the
places attached to the public service, confronted with a new system precluding the
redistribution of such places in its interest, called upon to surrender advantages
which a perverted partisanship had taught the American people belonged to
success, and perturbed with the suspicion, always raised in such an emergency,
that their rights in the conduct of this reform had not been scrupulously regarded,
should receive due acknowledgment and should confirm our belief that there is a
sentiment among the people better than a desire to hold office, and a patriotic
impulse upon which may safely rest the integrity of our institutions and the
strength and perpetuity of our Government.
The first official utterances of President Cleveland upon the 4th of
March, 1885, renewed the assurance that had been given. He
declared:
The people demand reform in the administration of the Government and the
application of business principles to business affairs. As a means to this end civil-
service reform should be in good faith enforced. Our citizens have the right to
protection from the incompetency of public employés who hold their places solely
as the reward of partisan service, and from the corrupting influences of those who
promise and the vicious who expect such rewards. And those who worthily seek
public employment have the right to insist that merit and competency shall be
recognized instead of party subserviency or the surrender of honest political belief.
How this system, thus inaugurated, this amphibious plan of
distributing the patronage of the country among his own partisans
and at the same time insisting upon the enforcement of civil-service
reform doctrines practically resulted finds its first illustration in the
celebrated circular of the Postmaster-General that was issued on the
29th of April, 1885. I do not propose to defile my observations by
reading that document. I allude to it for the purpose of saying that a
more thoroughly degraded, loathsome, execrable and detestable
utterance never was made by any public official of any political
persuasion in any country, or in any age. It was an invitation to every
libeller, every anonymous slanderer, every scurrilous defamer, to
sluice the feculent sewage of communities through the Post-Office
Department, with the assurance that, without any intimation or
information to the person aspersed, incumbents should be removed
and Democratic partisans appointed. I offered a resolution on the
4th of this month calling on the Postmaster-General for information
as to the number of removals of fourth-class postmasters, not
requiring confirmation by the Senate, between the 4th day of March,
1885, and that date. It was a simple proposition. It required nothing
but an inspection of the official register and a computation of
numbers. No names were required and no dates. There was a simple
question of arithmetic to ascertain the number of removals of fourth-
class postmasters not included in the list sent to the Senate by the
President, the salary being less than $1,000. Eighteen days elapsed.
There seemed to be some reluctance on the part of the Department
to comply with that request, and I thereupon offered a supplemental
resolution, which was adopted by the Senate, asking the Postmaster-
General to advise us whether that first resolution had been received,
and, if so, why it was not answered, and when a reply might be
expected.
On the second day following an answer came down. It does not
include the number of places that were filled where there had been
resignations. It does not include the list of those appointed where
there had been vacancies from death or any other cause; but simply
those who had been removed without cause and without hearing in
the space of the first twelve months of this administration pledged to
non-partisanship and civil-service reform. The number foots up
8,635. Eighty-six hundred and thirty-five removals of fourth-class
postmasters under an administration pledged by repeated utterances
not to remove except for cause, making an average, counting three
hundred and thirteen working days in that year, of twenty-eight
every day; and, counting seven hours as a day’s work, four removals
every hour, or at the rate of one for every fifteen minutes of time
from the 4th day of March, 1885, until the 4th of March, 1886. And
that is civil-service reform! That is non-partisanship in the
administration of this Government! That is exercising public office as
a public trust!
Mr. Cockrell. How many of these fourth-class postmasters are
there?
 Mr. Ingalls. I do not know.
Mr. Cockrell. About fifty-one thousand, are there not?
Mr. Ingalls. It makes no difference how many; they did the best
they could, and angels could do more. I see that the Senator from
Missouri is impatient; he is anxious that the axe should fall more
rapidly.
The President pro tempore. The Senator from Kansas will pause
a moment. It is the duty of the Chair to inform the occupants of the
galleries that the rules of the Senate forbid any expression of
approbation or disapprobation. It will be the painful duty of the
Chair to enforce that rule, if it is insisted upon.
Mr. Ingalls. I hope the Senator from Missouri will curb his
impatience and restrain his impetuosity. The Postmaster-General
will get through if you only give him time.
Mr. Cockrell. He will get through in four years at this rate.
Mr. Ingalls. One every fifteen minutes!
Mr. Cockrell. Fifty-one thousand is the number of fourth-class
postmasters, I believe, and only eight thousand in a year have been
removed.
Mr. Ingalls. Only one every fifteen minutes! How often do you
expect them to be removed? He has done the best he could. And this
does not include the number of those who resigned; this does not
include any except those who have been removed. To the Senator
from Missouri rising in his seat, impatient at the dilatory
procrastination of the Post-Office Department in not casting out
more Republican postmasters, I say this does not include all.
Undoubtedly many more than eighty-six hundred and thirty-five
have fallen beneath the axe of the Department or have been filled by
partisans of the party in power as a reward for efficient and faithful
party service in consequence of the retirement of thousands of
patriotic Republicans: and when the Senator from Missouri attempts
to convey the impression here that out of fifty-one thousand fourth-
class postmasters only eighty-six hundred and thirty-five have been
changed during this past year he is entirely outside the record. It is to
be observed that this is but a single Department. How many have
gone out of the State department, how many have gone out of the
Interior department, how many out of the Army and Navy
departments, and out of that illuminated Department of Justice, and
out of the Treasury, of course is entirely unknown, and probably will
always remain unknown till the secrets of earth are revealed at the
last day. They are carefully concealed; there are no lists furnished to
the press for publication. Therefore I trust that the friends of the
administration will be consoled, that the complaints which have been
so frequent hitherto of the want of activity on the part of the
administration in finding places for their friends will be tempered by
the consideration that they have done the best they could in the time
at their disposal.
Mr. President, the list of official utterances is not yet complete. On
the first day of this session President Cleveland again repeated his
declaration that the civil service was to be divorced from
partisanship, and he took occasion to inflict some more castigation
upon those who were endeavoring to force him off the civil-service
platform which he had declared he intended to occupy. This was his
language:
Lay siege to the patronage of Government, engrossing the time of public officers
with their importunities, spreading abroad the contagion of their disappointment,
and filling the air with the tumult of their discontent.
Rather florid, rather oriental phrase, but in its exactness
mathematical; a demonstration in geometry could not be more
explicit and satisfactory than that description by President Cleveland
of the occupation and the lamentations of the Democratic party. It
will bear repetition.
Lay siege to the patronage of Government, engrossing the time of public officers
with their importunities, spreading abroad the contagion of their disappointment,
and filling the air with the tumult of their discontent.
A besieging, importunate, contagious, tumultuous, discontented
organization.
There is more to the same effect in this document that I should like
to read, but time does not serve, nor is it material, because there are
other independent utterances to which I must pass; and I do this for
the purpose of showing the consistent and persistent adhesion of the
President of the United States to the declarations with which he
started out when he commenced to administer the Government.
On the 30th day of January, 1886, the ordinary avenues of
communication with the public being inaccessible, President
Cleveland availed himself of the interviewer, and in the Boston
Herald was printed a long letter detailing in quotations a
conversation with President Cleveland, the many points of which will
be found below. This was after this controversy, if you call it so,
between the President and Senate, had begun to develop and there
were some indications of approaching misunderstanding or
disagreement:
He next spoke of his position toward the Senate in the matter of confirmations to
office. He said it gave him some anxiety, for the Senate had been a good while in
disclosing what it meant to do. “They seem”—
He says plaintively—
“to distrust me,” said he, “if I am to accept what I hear from others. But I hear
nothing from them. They have not called upon me for information or for
documents.”
That complaint no longer exists.
“I have tried”—
He says—
“to deal honorably and favorably by them. My purpose was announced at the
beginning of my administration. I meant then to adhere to it. I have never changed
it. I do not mean to change it in the future. It seems to me unjust and ungenerous
in them”—
That is, in the Senate—
“unjust and ungenerous in them to suspect that I do. If I had not meant to
adhere to my policy it would have been foolish in me to begin it. I should have
escaped much in refusing to begin it. It is not at all pleasant for me to disappoint,
and I fear sometimes to offend, my party friends. Nothing but a sense of duty has
brought me to this step. Why run all this risk and incur this hard feeling only in the
end to retreat? It seems to me it would have been as impolitic as it is wrong. No; I
have tried to be true to my own pledges and the pledges of my party. We both
promised to divorce the offices of the country from being used for party service. I
have held to my promise, and I mean to hold to it.”
Then there was an answer to a question propounded by the
interviewer, in which he defines his relation toward offensive
partisanship in the Democratic party:
“I did not propose to hold party service in the past in the Democratic ranks as
against a man. On the contrary, it gave him a strong, equitable claim to office. He
had been excluded for twenty-four years because he was a Democrat. He should be
remembered for the same reason when a Democratic administration came into
power, provided he was a competent man for the position to be filled. What I
understand by civil-service reform, as I am carrying it out, is that the office-holders
shall be divorced from politics while they fill their positions under this
government. That rule I have meant to stand by.” I asked him if he was aware of
any deviation from it among his appointees. “If there has been any,” said he, “it has
not been called to my attention.” I suggested that some such charge had been made
in New York. He said he did not believe that there was any foundation for it, and
that it was well known there that his wishes were that the office-holders should
attend to the duties of their positions, and interfere neither with candidates nor
election contests.
And here comes in the significant statement bearing upon the duty
of Republicans in connection with these suspensions and removals
from office:
“My removals from office, such as are made,” said he, “are made for cause. It
would be absurd for me to undertake to give the country my reasons in all cases,
because it would be impracticable. When I have removed a Republican for political
reasons or for any other reasons, I would apply the same rule to my own party. I
think the Republican Senators should be just enough to believe this of me. They
ought to appreciate that I am trying to do my duty. Why they should continue to
distrust me I do not see. They do not come to me either personally or by committee
to get an understanding of my attitude, or to obtain explanations on points of
action to which they object. They stand off and question the sincerity of my
purposes.”
The eight thousand six hundred and thirty-five fourth-class
postmasters and the six hundred and forty-three suspensions before
the Senate and the thousands of changes in other departments “are
made for cause,” not for political reasons merely; but to give those
who have been so removed the opportunity to explain or defend
themselves would be “absurd” and “impracticable.”
But this is not all. Later in the winter the Civil Service Commission
was reorganized, and in a newspaper printed in this city appeared a
statement alleged to be “personal” and included in quotation marks,
and which it is commonly reported was in the handwriting of the
President.
I cannot rid myself—
He said, after speaking about the personnel of the Civil Service
Commission—
I cannot rid myself of the idea that this civil-service reform is something
intended to do practical good and not a mere sentiment invented for the purpose of
affording opportunity to ventilate high-sounding notions and fine phrases.
He alludes to the action of the Civil-Service Commission about a
weigher in the city of Brooklyn, and says:
 When the Civil Service Commission consulted with me as to the status of Mr.
Sterling and the true construction of the rule bearing upon that subject, I agreed
with them in their second opinion that the position of weigher was subject to an
examination, and that it should be filled by one who by means of a proper
examination under the law proved himself competent and eligible. But it seemed to
me that the good of the service required that the person to be appointed should be
possessed of certain traits and qualifications which no theoretical examination
would develop. One having in charge two or three hundred men of the class with
which a weigher has to deal should possess personal courage, energy, decision and
firmness of character. It is entirely certain that the possession of such
qualifications could not in the least be determined by the result of an examination
organized for the purpose of testing an applicant’s knowledge and education.
And he closes:
No cause can gain by injustice or by a twisting of its purposes to suit particular
tastes. And when a result is fairly reached through the proper operation of methods
adopted to further a reform, it should be accepted—especially by the friends of the
movement. They should not permit those of whom they require submission to say,
with any semblance of truth, that they themselves submit only when the result
accords with their views.
This closes the public declarations of the President of the United
States upon the views which he entertains as to the method and
plans and system upon which the public service is to be conducted
under his administration. There are some interesting details as to the
practical effects and results of the effort of the administration to
purify the public service, which I would be glad if I had time to refer
to, but I believe I will forbear. I can only say that it seems from an
inspection of the record as if the cry “put the rascals out” had been
changed in effect to “put the rascals in.” Of course Mr. President, no
party is exempt from accidents, no organization has a monopoly
either of good men or of bad men, and in calling attention to the
results of civil-service reform as applied to this administration, I
should be insincere if I were to assume that such results had followed
from any predetermined purpose to put bad men into office.
We heard a great deal during the campaign about the corruptions,
profligacy, misdeeds, and maladministration of Republican officials.
I can only say that in view of what has occurred under this
administration, if I were inclined to be uncharitable I could with
entire propriety say that while the Republican party was in power it
endeavored whenever it detected crime anywhere to punish it; but
one of the practical results of Democratic administration has been
the reverse, and that is to place in office a very large number of
admitted and convicted felons. I have before me a selection from
which I will, I believe, in support of this view of the case, give a law
extract, stating in advance that these compilations are made from
Democratic newspapers which, of course, is a mitigation of the
slander, though it does not necessarily destroy its credibility.
Mr. ——, of Baltimore, who was made an Indian inspector in 1885,
had been involved in notorious election frauds and was condemned
by the civil-service reform Independents of Maryland as a
companion of Higgins, as a ballot-box stuffer, and a professional
gambler.
The postmaster at Sioux City, Iowa, was convicted and sentenced
in Dakota for violation of the pension laws. The man who was
removed to make a place for this eminent civil-service reformer had
eight months yet to serve, and there was no complaint against him
even to the extent that he was an offensive partisan.
Mr. Holmes, a postmaster in Mississippi, had been involved in
notorious election-fraud scandals.
Mr. Shannon, appointed postmaster at Meriden, Miss., was the
editor of the Mercury newspaper, which after President Grant’s
death contained a rabid editorial attacking the General’s character;
and he had been indicted in the United States court for “unlawfully
and criminally conspiring with many others for the evasion of the
civil rights law.”
In Rhode Island a Democratic postmaster was appointed who had
been in the preceding three months arrested nine times for violation
of the liquor law.
In Pennsylvania a man was appointed in the Philadelphia Mint
who openly confessed to writing a forged letter from Neal Dow to be
used in influencing the German vote in the State of Ohio the
preceding year.
There have been some strange things done in Maine. I almost
hesitate to quote this, but if I am wrong the Senators from that State
will undoubtedly correct me. It is alleged that the postmaster in the
town of Lincolnville was at the time of his appointment actually in
the Portland jail, where he was serving a term for a misdemeanor.
 An agent by the name of Judd, who was appointed in the Bureau of
Labor Statistics, was, upon inquiry as to the fact whether he had
been a horse-thief and served in the penitentiary, suspended from
office. The writer states that the only ground for supposing that he
was not a horse thief arose from the fact that they do not put men in
the penitentiary for stealing horses out West: that if he was alive it
was a reasonable, natural conclusion that he had not stolen any
horses. Nobody denied the penitentiary.
A gentleman named Richard Board, of Kentucky, was appointed in
July, on the recommendation of Comptroller Durham, clerk in the
railway mail service and assigned to duty in New Mexico. This is
under the Postmaster-General, who found leisure between removing
postmasters every fifteen minutes to appoint this man in another
branch of the service where he incautiously mentioned to his friends
something about his previous history, and it appeared that he had
been three times arrested in Cincinnati for obtaining money under
false pretenses, that he had been twice arrested for stealing in
Kentucky, and once in Texas—a variegated and diversified career.
“No pent up Utica” contracted his powers. He had stolen in three
states. His father was a very wealthy man in high standing who had
spent a great deal of money to protect his son, and through him he
secured the endorsement of Comptroller Durham, and after he had
been in service for a few weeks he committed a number of robberies,
stole $163 from the money order service, and at the date of this
communication was lying in jail at Santa Fé awaiting trial.
The Senator from Indiana [Mr. Voorhees] yesterday took
occasion to advert with somewhat of animated hilarity to the
suggestion of the Senator from Iowa about the evolutionary
condition of the Democratic party, and dwelt with considerable
unction upon a term that the Senator from Iowa had applied to the
Democracy in his very able and interesting speech: “a protoplasmic”
cell, and the Senator then proceeded to give us the definition of the
term as it appears in the dictionaries, and suggested that if those
facts had been known at the time when the canvass was pending Mr.
Cleveland would undoubtedly have been counted out in New York.
The Senator from Iowa might have gone further in his application
of the doctrine of evolution with much propriety. Geology teaches us
that in the process of being upward from the protoplasmic cell,
through one form of existence to another there are intermediary and
connecting stages, in which the creature bears some resemblance to
the state from which it has emerged and some to the state to which it
is proceeding. History is stratified politics; every stratum is
fossiliferous; and I am inclined to think that the political geologist of
the future in his antiquarian researches between the triassic series of
1880 and the cretaceous series of 1888 as he inspects the jurassic
Democratic strata of 1884 will find some curious illustrations of the
doctrine of political evolution.
In the transition from the fish to the bird there is an anomalous
animal, long since extinct, named by the geologists the pterodactyl,
or the winged reptile, a lizard with feathers upon its paws and
plumes upon its tail. A political system which illustrates in its
practical operations the appointment by the same administration of
Eugene Higgins and Dorman B. Eaton can properly be regarded as in
the transition epoch and characterized as the pterodactyl of politics.
It is, like that animal, equally adapted to waddling and dabbling in
the slime and mud of partisan politics and soaring aloft with
discordant cries into the glittering and opalescent empyrean of civil-
service reform.
The President closes his recent message to the Senate in this
language:
The pledges I have made were made to the people, and to them I am responsible
for the manner in which they have been redeemed. I am not responsible to the
Senate and I am unwilling to submit my actions and official conduct to them for
judgment.
There are no grounds for an allegation that the fear of being found false to my
professions influences me in declining to submit to the demands of the Senate. I
have not constantly refused to suspend officials, and thus incurred the displeasure
of political friends, and yet willfully broken faith with the people for the sake of
being false to them.
Neither the discontent of party friends nor the allurements constantly offered of
confirmation of appointees conditioned upon the avowal that suspensions have
been made on party grounds alone, nor the threat proposed in the resolution now
before the Senate that no confirmations will be made unless the demands of that
body be complied with, are sufficient to discourage or deter me from following in
the way which I am convinced leads to better government for the people.
He is not responsible to the Senate, nor is the Senate responsible
to him; both are alike responsible to the people. But in the cases at
bar we are compelled to inquire, in justice to the people, whether
those pledges have been redeemed, or whether they have been
broken, violated, and disregarded. Had the patronage of the
Government, within proper limits, been turned over for its exercise
to the party intrusted with power by a majority of the people there
could have been no complaint, but upon the assurances that I have
read, the declaration was made that in every case where an
incumbent was competent and qualified he should remain in office
till the expiration of his term.
When, therefore, some were suspended and others were left, what
is the irresistible inference, after the declarations of the President,
except that these persons were suspended for cause either affecting
their personal integrity or their official administration? Upon the
ground, then, of personal justice, if no other, we are entitled to know
whether wrong has been done by the accusations that have been filed
in the Departments, so that we may protect those who are unable to
defend themselves from injustice and defamation.
But there is another reason, and to me a still more convincing
reason, why we should be advised in the case of these suspensions
what are the papers, the official documents, and the reports on the
files of the departments affecting the administration of these offices,
and that is this: under the tenure-of-office act, every official
suspended is reinstated by the provisions of section 1768 of the
Revised Statutes, if the Senate adjourns without confirming the
designated person, and continues to exercise and discharge the
duties of that office, until he is again suspended by the President.
Therefore, in acting upon these cases we have a double duty to
perform; in the first place, to decide whether the person suspended
was properly suspended, and in the next place, whether he is a
competent person to be restored to office under and by virtue of the
operation of the statute under which he was suspended. If he is not a
competent person then he ought not to be restored, and we cannot
determine whether he is competent and qualified and fit to discharge
the duties of that office until we have the official declarations and
statements upon which the action of the President was based.
Since this debate began, there are indications that the President
has become convinced that his position is untenable, and that he has
concluded to yield to the reasonable requests of the Senate and
relieve suspended officials from the otherwise inevitable imputations
upon their conduct and character. I find the following
correspondence in one of the metropolitan journals, which if
authentic relieves the relation between the President and the Senate
of the principal restraint:
Committee on Finance, United States Senate, March 17, 1886.

Dear Sir: Will you please advise the Committee on Finance whether or not there
are any papers or charges on file reflecting against the official or moral character of
——, late collector of internal revenue for the first district of ——, suspended?
If there are any such papers or charges will you please communicate their nature
and character to the committee?

Very truly, yours,

JUSTIN S. MORRILL.

Hon. Daniel Manning,

Secretary of the Treasury.

March 19, 1886.

Sir: Your communication on behalf of the Finance Committee of the Senate,

dated March 17, 1886, asking whether or not there are any papers or charges on file
reflecting against the official or moral character of ——, late collector of internal
revenue for the first district of ——, suspended, is received.
In reply thereto I have the honor to state that, so far as this inquiry relates to a
suspension from office, I feel bound by the rules laid down in the President’s recent
message to the Senate upon the general subject of such suspensions.
But in order that I may surely act within the requirements of the statute relating
to the furnishing by this Department of information to the Senate, I beg leave to
remind the committee that the office referred to has no fixed term attached to it,
and to further state that the President is satisfied that a change in the incumbency
of said office will result in an improvement of the public service, and that the policy
of the present administration will be better carried out by such change.
Except as the same may be involved in these considerations, no papers
containing charges reflecting upon the official or moral character of the suspended
officer mentioned in your communication are in the custody of this Department.

Respectfully, yours,
D. MANNING, Secretary.

Hon. Justin S. Morrill,

Chairm’n of the Senate Com. on Finance.
 But whether this be true or not, this is not the forum in which this
controversy is to be ultimately decided. The Executive is not on trial
before the Senate; the Senate is not on trial before the Executive; but
both, as to the sincerity of their professions and the consistency of
their actions, are on trial before that greater, wiser, and more
powerful tribunal—the enlightened conscience of the people, from
whose verdict there is neither exculpation nor appeal.
 THE GREAT TARIFF CAMPAIGN OF 1888.

The views which point to the tendency of the Democratic party in

the direction of Free Trade, at least to their antagonism to the theory
of Protection for protection’s sake, are well given in the special
message of President Cleveland, given elsewhere in this work. A wing
of the Democratic party, headed by Samuel J. Randall, of
Pennsylvania, dissented from this view, and opposed both the
Morrison and the Mills bills. For the purpose of illustrating the views
of this class of Democrats, as well as because of the distinction of the
speaker, we append