351.101 73 
 G ft 2V 
 
 JLTS THEORY 
 
 ADDRESS OF 
 
 Hon. Henry F. Greene 
 
 United States Civil Service Commissioner 
 AT THE 
 
 ASSEMBLY OF CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIONS 
 
 CHICAGO, MAY 7-8, 1908 
 
 \ 
 
 ILLINOIS LiSRARV 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE 
 
 NATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE REFORM LEAGUE 
 
 79 WALL STREET. NEW YORK 
 
 1908 
 
• v 
 
 - J- r r - • - ' *<* 4 
 
 - 
 
 • • ,'iV c V ' ■' •<? ~ ; J i ‘ A •*> 
 
 ff->* **3 > - r 
 
 . 
 
 . 
 
 v " 
 
 
 VU- O, 
 
 
 Lp; <* . 
 
 i • v-< -; 
 
 - 
 
 - 
 
 <v 
 
 ' v ■ 
 
 
 VI jr ^ r , 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - Vv i zgl EBP sjs. •" 
 
 J ; T S; -»* 
 
 j ,•*• • . </ - • '- - ' v- 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 *»* . 
 
 - * <w 
 
 
 '.. •: * l - v : -V• -,i- ,-T *-.v 
 
RESULTS os. THEORY 
 
 » 
 
 ADDRESS OF 
 
 Hon. Henry F. Greene 
 
 United States Civil Service Commissioner 
 AT THE 
 
 ASSEMBLY OF CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSIONS 
 
 CHICAGO, MAY 7-8, 1908 
 
 WIVERSTTY OF ILLINOIS LIBRARY 
 
 stp s o ms 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE 
 
 NATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE REFORM LEAGUE 
 
 79 WALL STREET, NEW YORK 
 
 1908 
 
Press of 
 
 THE CHIEF 
 Journal of The Civil Service 
 
 New York City 
 
3 $1. hcftfS 
 <5 £32r 
 
 RESULTS vs. THEORY 
 
 A Paper Read at the Assembly of 
 Civil Service Commissions at 
 Chicago, Illinois, May 7, 1908 
 
 By 
 
 HON. HENRY F. GREENE 
 
 I feel it necessary to make two 
 preliminary remarks about this paper. 
 First, what will be stated will be 
 rather trite and probably familiar to 
 a very large proportion of those 
 present. The only excuse for this 
 is that it is difficult to produce new 
 facts or ideas on the subject of civil 
 service reform, and that some of the 
 things I will say may be in the na¬ 
 ture of information to some of those 
 present and be useful to them, and 
 will have, therefore, to be received 
 with patience by the rest. 
 
 Second, the subject assigned to me 
 is one which treated fully would un¬ 
 doubtedly exhaust the patience of 
 this conference. Results and theory 
 constitute the whole of any subject 
 and to fully discuss the relationship 
 or alleged antagonism between re¬ 
 sults and theory would necessitate 
 a full discussion of all the aspects of 
 civil service reform. This, of course, 
 is impossible. Furthermore, there is 
 not and never can be any such an¬ 
 tagonism between results and theory 
 as is implied in the title. If the re¬ 
 sults do not bear out the theory it 
 is not properly speaking a theory at 
 all, but a hypothesis which can never 
 be verified. In this instance there is 
 no antagonism, properly speaking, 
 between the theory of civil service 
 reform and its results. 
 
 It will therefore be my object 
 briefly to state in the first place the 
 
 theory upon which the various civil 
 service laws have been based, and a 
 few facts which bear out that theory; 
 and secondly the objections made to 
 the reform and a few of the instances 
 in which these objections have been 
 tested and found to be simply hy¬ 
 pothetical, and destitute of any actual 
 force. s 
 
 The first thought occurring to 
 Jenks, Curtis, and t the others who 
 initiated the merit system was un¬ 
 doubtedly to increase the efficiency of 
 the service. It was too manifest in 
 the later sixties that the condition of 
 public service in this country was 
 scandalously inefficient, and that gov¬ 
 ernmental work in the United States 
 was done in a manner inferior to that 
 obtaining in other highly enlight¬ 
 ened civilized countries. The thought 
 was to obtain a remedy. It was felt 
 that the first remedy necessary was 
 to fill positions with sole regard to 
 the efficiency of the public service. 
 
 In addition to this utilitarian con¬ 
 ception a moral development in the 
 public mind influenced largely the re¬ 
 form movement. It was felt that if 
 the public service was to be advanced 
 it was impossible to have any other 
 consideration in appointments than 
 the public good. An illustration from 
 the rules of law will perhaps be in 
 point. A man to whom money is 
 entrusted for the purposes of invest¬ 
 ment is allowed by law to make no 
 profit out of it except his compensa¬ 
 tion in the shape of commission. 
 The courts well know that to allow 
 in the slightest degree any consider¬ 
 ation to enter into the investment 
 except the welfare of the owner of 
 the fund will greatly imperil its safe- 
 
ty—possibly result in its loss. We 
 have excellent authority for the 
 proposition that “no man can serve 
 two masters/’ The courts know that 
 the agent w r ho is looking for his own 
 profit cannot adequately safeguard 
 the profit of his clients. So the grad¬ 
 ual evolution of ethical standards 
 brought it l about t,hat the public 
 conscience realized that the appoint¬ 
 ing officer ought to have no purpose 
 except the public good. Without 
 question the greatest moral move¬ 
 ment that this country has ever seen 
 was that which led to the abolition 
 of slavery. It is a notable fact that 
 the early advocates of civil service 
 reform were persons, like George 
 William Curtis, who had been edu¬ 
 cated in the school of abolition. 
 These people felt that to allow ap¬ 
 pointments to be in the slightest de¬ 
 gree contributory to the welfare of 
 political parties, except in so far as 
 good appointments would justify the 
 retention in power of a political 
 party, was to allow a breach of trust 
 akin to speculating with the funds of 
 a client. 
 
 Good men in the period before the 
 w'ar and since that time have ac¬ 
 tively participated in the spoils sys¬ 
 tem, but there had been an evolution 
 in the conscience of the most en¬ 
 lightened part of the community 
 which had brought it about that the 
 longer use of public offices for the 
 advancement of private political in¬ 
 terests was intolerable. 
 
 The gross inefficiency and scandal¬ 
 ous mismanagement of institutions 
 like the New York Custom House 
 and the Consular Service forced these 
 ethical conceptions upon the public 
 mind in the early days of the reform 
 movement. 
 
 In seeking for a rule of appoint¬ 
 ment which would extirpate this 
 cancer in the body politic the mind 
 of reformers was turned towards ap¬ 
 pointment by means of competition. 
 In his address delivered at Saratoga 
 September 8, 1881, Mr. Curtis said: 
 
 “Personal influence in appoint¬ 
 ments can be annulled only by free 
 and open competition. By that bridge 
 we can return to the practice of 
 
 Washington and to the intention of 
 the Constitution. That is the shoe 
 of swiftness and the magic sword by 
 which the President can pierce and 
 outrun the protean enemy of sophis¬ 
 try and tradition which prevents him 
 from asserting his power. If you 
 say that success in competitive lit¬ 
 erary examination does not prove 
 fitness to adjust customs duties or to 
 distribute letters or to appraise linen 
 or to measure molasses, I answer 
 that the reform does not propose 
 that fitness shall be proved by a com¬ 
 petitive literary examination. It 
 proposes to annul personal influence 
 and political favoritism by making 
 appointment depend upon proved 
 • capacity. To determine this it pro¬ 
 poses first to test the comparative 
 general intelligence of all applicants 
 and their special knowledge of the 
 particular official duties required, and 
 then to prove the practical faculty 
 of the most intelligent applicants by 
 actual trial in the performance of the 
 duties before they are appointed. If 
 it be still said that success in such a 
 competition may not prove fitness, it 
 is enough to reply that success in 
 obtaining the favor of some kind of 
 boss, which is the present system, 
 presumptively proves unfitness.” 
 
 It is impossible to state more clear¬ 
 ly or in more compact form the the¬ 
 ory which underlaid the use of com¬ 
 petitive examinations so far as they 
 were intended to promote the effi¬ 
 ciency of the service. 
 
 There was, however, another im¬ 
 portant object of this reform so far 
 as the matter of administration was 
 concerned, of a thoroughly practical 
 character. It was the desire for the 
 economical administration of the af¬ 
 fairs of the Government. Where ap¬ 
 pointments are made with a sole 
 view to the public welfare no more 
 appointments are made than are nec¬ 
 essary to do the public work. The 
 man who is engaged in private busi¬ 
 ness with the sole object of gain does 
 not make two clerks do the work of 
 one, but where appointments are 
 made either from a desire to ad¬ 
 vance the interests of parties, of fac- 
 
tions, or of leaders, or where they 
 are made from motives of sympathy, 
 the 'natural impulse is to have as 
 many employees as your appropri¬ 
 ation will cover; moreover, where po¬ 
 litical influence controls and a can¬ 
 didate is pushed it is, of course, pos¬ 
 sibly to make room for the new man 
 in the old brutal method of simply 
 turning out some former employee, 
 but that is for the ordinary kind 
 hearted man a very disagreeable task, 
 and besides, the man who is turned 
 out has his backers and there is dan¬ 
 ger of exciting their antagonism by 
 his removal. Much the easier and 
 simpler way is to make a new office. 
 This was the method in vogue under 
 the spoils system in the national 
 government prior to 1883. It is still 
 in vogue wherever that system ob¬ 
 tains. Destroying entirely any polit¬ 
 ical or personal interest in an ap¬ 
 pointment as that interest is de¬ 
 stroyed by the establishment of a 
 system of competition it was thought 
 would result in the restriction of ap¬ 
 pointees to the number required by 
 the needs of the public service. 
 
 The third object, and by far the 
 most important sought to be gained 
 by the merit system, was the destruc¬ 
 tion of the machine and the system 
 of machine government. All of those 
 who have advocated this reform have 
 been thorough believers in democ¬ 
 racy and in the possibilities of a 
 democratic government. There are 
 many communities on the globe at 
 present and there have been many 
 in the past where a democratic gov¬ 
 ernment is impossible on account of 
 the lack of intelligence or moral 
 character among the masses of the 
 people, but the founders of ! civil 
 service reform and those who have 
 advocated the cause since its foun¬ 
 dation have never been convinced 
 that this was true of the United 
 States. 
 
 They have believed that the people 
 of the United States in all of the 
 great crisis of its history have ulti¬ 
 mately given a righteous judgment 
 between the contending questions of 
 policy which have been brought be¬ 
 fore them for decision. They have 
 
 firmly believed that it was perfectly 
 possible by the unbiased exercise of 
 the will of the majority to have an 
 economical, moral and efficient gov¬ 
 ernment in all of the communities of 
 the country and in the country at 
 large. They have therefore been of 
 the opinion that the activities of of¬ 
 fice holders in organizing and con¬ 
 trolling political movements was an 
 unmixed evil, because public intelli¬ 
 gence and virtue were forces which 
 had guided this country right in the 
 past and would, if undisturned, guide 
 it aright in the future. The object of 
 the civil service law was to secure a 
 body of appointees who did not owe 
 their places to politics and wffio 
 would keep out of politics except in 
 so far as other citizens go into poli¬ 
 tics. Since it is absolutely impossi¬ 
 ble to keep a man who owes his 
 place to political considerations from 
 endeavoring to control political 
 movement, it was believed Hhat if 
 the political consideration in ap¬ 
 pointment was removed the country 
 would be freed from the pernicious 
 and invariably injurious activities of 
 wire-pullers, office-hunters, and of¬ 
 fice-holders seeking to retain their 
 places. 
 
 How far the theory of civil serv¬ 
 ice reform has been exemplified in 
 practice is the question which is now 
 before us. There are the same diffi¬ 
 culties in determining this question 
 that inhere in all political or social 
 questions. The science of govern¬ 
 ment differs in one respect from the 
 natural sciences, for in the latter it 
 is possible to make a satisfactory ex¬ 
 periment, while in the former it is 
 not. For instance, you can combine 
 two chemical elements and then you 
 can try the effect upon the two of 
 a third. You know positively that 
 only those two elements are in the 
 combination before the third is in¬ 
 troduced, and the changes which fol¬ 
 low you know are only such as are 
 caused by the third element. But in 
 governmental matters it is not possi¬ 
 ble to so gauge the effect of an in¬ 
 novation. Civil service reform has 
 been gradually tried upon the Ameri¬ 
 can body politic during the last 
 
twenty-five years, during that time 
 many other things have changed in 
 our government. It is not possible, 
 therefore, to credit all improvements 
 in administration to the reform of the 
 civil service. It is not possible to 
 measure in figures and dollars and 
 cents the effect of the merit system 
 on the administrative system. The 
 Departments at Washington, for in¬ 
 stance, have grown largely from 
 causes with which the merit system 
 has no connection. The Departments 
 may have saved hundreds of em¬ 
 ployees by their removal of politics, 
 but on the other hand they have had 
 to increase their force possibly by 
 hundreds of thousands to meet their 
 increased duties. These economies 
 of the merit system can not be easi¬ 
 ly estimated. 
 
 So also it is with efficiency. Ef¬ 
 ficiency is a thing which it is partic¬ 
 ularly difficult to estimate. It is im¬ 
 possible to tell in dollars and cents 
 the increased value of any one clerk 
 or stenographer from his increased 
 attention to business, and so it is im¬ 
 possible to tell in every case, in 
 dollars and cents, the improvement 
 of the governmental service by the 
 competitive system. The only thing 
 that can be done is to observe and 
 reason as to what must have been 
 the effect of the change from the old 
 system of appointments to the pres¬ 
 ent one, and when we see that the 
 effect of that change must have been 
 increased efficiency we may know 
 that the increased efficiency is there. 
 We cannot, for instance, but believe 
 that the Departments are better run 
 now when their heads of Depart¬ 
 ments have all their time to attend 
 to administrative work than they 
 were in the seventies when the entire 
 time of each head of • Department 
 was taken up with appointments. 
 Then any time given to non-political 
 administrative work was snatched 
 furtively from the hearings clamored 
 for by the multitude of Congressmen 
 and their applicants for office. 
 
 In one Department of the Govern¬ 
 ment, however, there has been kept 
 a very exact account of the efficiency 
 of employees. This is in the railway 
 
 mail department. This large service 
 is one peculiarly easy to fill by ex¬ 
 amination. Its duties are of a simple 
 character and ability to discharge the 
 duties of a railway mail clerk is easi¬ 
 ly tested by examination. President 
 Cleveland classified this service just 
 before he left office in 1889 , having 
 probably first filled many places 
 therein with Democrats. Mr. Harri¬ 
 son, coming into office, suspended the 
 classification until most of the places 
 were filled with Republicans, and 
 then renewed it. But during the 
 nineteen years which have elapsed 
 since that time there has been a rigid 
 observance of the rules of the merit 
 system so far as appointments to the 
 railway mail service are concerned. 
 
 Under the spoils system in 1877 , 
 2,500 pieces of mail in the railway 
 mail service were correctly distrib¬ 
 uted for every one erroneously dis¬ 
 tributed. In 1889 , the service was 
 still under the spoils system, yet 
 there had been during the twelve 
 years preceding an improvement. In 
 1889 , 3,954 pieces were correctly dis¬ 
 tributed for each error. This was an 
 increase in the number of correct 
 pieces for each error over 1877 of 
 about 56 per cent. In 1889 the merit 
 system was established. In 1900 the 
 number of pieces correctly distrib¬ 
 uted for each error was 10 , 175 , an 
 increase in the number of correct 
 pieces to each error in eleven years 
 of 254 per cent. Whether under the 
 spoils system or under the system of 
 competition some improvement is 
 undoubtedly inherent in any service; 
 but the point to w r hich your attention 
 is called here is that while in twelve 
 years of the spoils system the in¬ 
 crease in efficiency was only 56 per 
 cent., in eleven years of the merit sys¬ 
 tem the increase was 254 per cent. 
 
 Notice the effect of the application 
 by President Harrison to the railway 
 mail service of the spoils system. In 
 1889 , 3,954 pieces were correctly dis¬ 
 tributed for each error. In the early 
 part of 1889 the service was sacked. 
 The places were distributed on the 
 basis of ability in wire pulling, in 
 place of those evil minded believers 
 
in free trade who had previously held 
 them, among persons who believed in 
 the doctrine of the protective tariff. 
 The result was that in the year 1890, 
 when the offices were all filled by new 
 men, the number of pieces correctly 
 distributed decreased from 3,954 to 
 each error to 2,834, a decrease in 
 round numbers of about 30 per cent, 
 or, in other words, an increase in 
 errors of about thirty per cent. It 
 would be hardly possible to conceive 
 of a more complete demonstration 
 that its theory and its practice corres¬ 
 pond that is here given of the effect 
 of the merit system. We have the 
 improvement marked under the merit 
 system. To this the answer was 
 made by the eminent advocate of the 
 spoils system in Philadelphia, the 
 present Mayor of Philadelphia, that 
 such improvement would have taken 
 place anyhow. But to this figure fur¬ 
 nish the answer. While there would 
 have been some improvement any¬ 
 how, the improvement is about five 
 times as great in the same period of 
 time under the merit system as under 
 the application of the doctrines so 
 dear to Senator Marcy, the late Mr. 
 Grosvenor and Mayor Reyborn that 
 to the victor belong the spoils. More¬ 
 over, the “clean sweep” of 1889 effect¬ 
 ually paralyzed progress. In 1899 the 
 number of correct pieces of mail for 
 each error was 3,954; in 1890, after 
 the filling of all places under the spoils 
 system, the number of correct pieces 
 for each error was only 2,834, an in¬ 
 crease of errors of 28.33 per cent. 
 
 The establishment of a practical 
 system of examinations is one of 
 the things which was believed to be 
 possible by the advocates of civil ser¬ 
 vice reform, and one of the things 
 called for by their theory which its 
 opponents claimed would never be 
 done. In the early days of the Com¬ 
 mission there was occasionally some 
 ground for the criticism of the spoils¬ 
 men. The English examinations, 
 which are intended to fill a much 
 higher class of offices than any here¬ 
 tofore appointed by examination in 
 this country, were possibly too much 
 followed. The standard was too high. 
 For a time geography was rated as 
 
 one of the essential elements of the 
 ordinary Departmental clerk exam¬ 
 ination, and I believe history also. 
 It was soon brought forcibly to the 
 attention of the Commission that the 
 duties of a Departmental clerk are 
 really of a simple character and that 
 a simple examination adequately tests 
 them. The present examination, 
 therefore, simply applies to the ability 
 of an applicant to read, write and 
 cypher, the arithmetical knowledge 
 called for being less than ought to 
 be required for admission to a high 
 school. It is a striking fact that the 
 examination given for Departmental 
 clerk is one which ought to be passed 
 by a child who has gone through the 
 eighth grade in any of the larger 
 cities of the country, certainly in 
 Washington, but on the other hand 
 it is taken : n almost every case by 
 persons who had from one to four 
 years high school experience and in a 
 large number of cases by men who 
 have gone through college, and that 
 yet only 48 per cent of these who take 
 the examination pass it. Still, how¬ 
 ever, it cannot be said that we ex¬ 
 amine people in Greek roots or in¬ 
 tegral calculus for Departmental 
 positions. The working of the sys¬ 
 tem is undoubtedly to evolve, and it 
 has suceeded in evolving, a simple 
 and practical examination. 
 
 The simplicity and practicality of 
 examinations conducted by the Com¬ 
 mission has been showm in their flexi¬ 
 bility. Many things cannot be tested 
 by a simple literary examination con¬ 
 sisting of questions and answers or 
 problems, and there are many grades 
 of examination which are required, for 
 the different grades in the service.. 
 At opposite ends of the Federal ser¬ 
 vice two very different classes of diffi¬ 
 culties have presented themselves to 
 the Commission of which I am a 
 member. In the Interstate Com¬ 
 merce Commission and the Bureau of 
 Corporations there was need of 
 special agents and examinators. The 
 men that were wanted would not be 
 simply clerks, but it was desired to 
 obtain men of wide information, 
 lengthy business experience and a 
 high grade of studies, especially in 
 
sociological questions. Professor 
 Adams of the Interstate Commerce 
 Commission in the beginning obtained 
 from the President permission to ap¬ 
 point a number of special agents and 
 examiners. It was represented to him 
 that the Commission could furnish 
 him with what he wanted, and after a 
 considerable discussion he finally con¬ 
 cluded to make a trial of its machin¬ 
 ery. The applicant w r as required to 
 present a thesis on which he was 
 given a grade of 60. He received a 
 grade of 30 for his technical exper¬ 
 ience and of 10 for his general educa¬ 
 tion, training and experience. The 
 applicants, 401 in number, were divid¬ 
 ed into ten registers according as 
 their experience or thesis placed them 
 in particular fields of railroad work 
 and knowledge. So satisfactory was 
 the result of this examination that 
 the permission which the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission had received 
 to appoint without examination a 
 large number of eligibles has never 
 been used. The Interstate Commerce 
 Commission preferred to take people 
 which it got from the registers of the 
 Commission. 
 
 In 1906 a similar examination w r as 
 held for the office of the Bureau of 
 Corporations, the grade being 20 for 
 a thesis, 50 for special training and 
 experience, and 30 for general educa¬ 
 tional training. The circular announc¬ 
 ing the examination contained the 
 following: 
 
 The evidence of this special train¬ 
 ing which the competitor will be re¬ 
 quired to submit will fall into the fol¬ 
 lowing classification: (1) His sworn 
 statement showing (a) his specialized 
 and advanced study in economics, 
 politics, *md law (this information 
 also forms a part of the basis for 
 rating the first branch, and repetition 
 is unnecessary, as one complete 
 statement will answer for both pur¬ 
 poses), and (b) his business or pro¬ 
 fessional experience. (2) The recom¬ 
 mendations of persons qualified to 
 judge as to his fitness for any one 
 or more of the several groups of posi¬ 
 tions described below. The value of 
 these recommendations will necessari¬ 
 ly depend upon the extent and nature 
 
 of ;the recommendofis acquaintance 
 with the competitor, which must be 
 stated in the recommendation. (3) 
 Any writings, the result of his orig¬ 
 inal work, which the competitor may 
 have published on economic subjects 
 of any kind (including financial and 
 statistical), or in relation to corpora¬ 
 tions. 
 
 Since the holding of this examina¬ 
 tion 22 appointments have been made 
 from the register established as its 
 result to the thorough satisfaction of 
 the important bureaus which have 
 called upon it. In fact, in the earlier 
 days of the Bureau of Corporations, 
 its positions were practically filled 
 without examination owing to their 
 difficult character, but after a thorough 
 trial this examination was established 
 at the request of Mr. Garfield. 
 
 A similar examination was held with 
 success to fill positions in the Depart¬ 
 ment of Labor of investigators into 
 the employment of child labor. 
 
 At the other extremity from the ser¬ 
 vice of special agents of the Bureau 
 of Corporations or of the Interstate 
 Commerce Commission is the Rural 
 Carrier Service. For this service it 
 was impracticable to impose an exam¬ 
 ination as difficult as that given for 
 Departmental clerk or even that given 
 for messenger or watchman in the 
 Departmental service. The examina¬ 
 tion for this service, therefore, con¬ 
 sists simply in reading a few ad¬ 
 dresses of not a very difficult charac¬ 
 ter, in adding a column of decimals 
 (dollars and cents), and in answering 
 two or three practical questions about 
 the duties of a rural carrier. As this 
 examination can be passed by an over¬ 
 whelming majority of the applicants, 
 and as the registers are very small, 
 there being but few applicants to a 
 place, in order to avoid the effect of 
 political influence it was necessary to 
 certify but one eligible for each ap¬ 
 pointment, and this has been done. 
 That the service thus obtained is sat¬ 
 isfactory is shown by the fact that the 
 removals therefrom in a year for cause 
 have been found to be less than one- 
 fourth of those made in the fourth 
 class postmaster service, where the ap- 
 
pointments are based entirely on po¬ 
 litical considerations. 
 
 The second advantage promised by 
 the theory of the merit system is 
 economy in the service. As has al¬ 
 ready been shown, it is difficult to 
 figure this out in dollars and cents. 
 Two tests, however, may be cited, 
 
 one applying to the service at large, 
 and one to the force of the Civil Ser¬ 
 vice Commission, the latter occurring 
 under my own observation. 
 
 From 1883 to 1896 the service in 
 
 Washington was divided between 
 competitive and noncompetitive 
 forces, the former appointed by com¬ 
 petitive examination and the latter 
 
 under, the spoils system. During that 
 period there was an increase of 37 
 per cent, in the number and 43 per 
 cent, in the salaries of the unclassi¬ 
 fied appointees, who were all ap¬ 
 pointed without examination under 
 
 the patronage system. During the 
 same period there was a slight de¬ 
 crease in the number of classified 
 positions as well as a slight decrease 
 in the amount of salaries paid for the 
 same. 
 
 The period in question was one dur¬ 
 ing which the scope of governmental 
 powers was not enlarged. There 
 was no war and no very great in¬ 
 crease in the duties of the Depart¬ 
 ments by means of legislation. Con¬ 
 sequently a great increase in the 
 force was not to be looked for. From 
 1896 to 1908 an increase in the De¬ 
 partments was to be expected. The 
 Spanish war and the recent large ex¬ 
 tensions of the functions of govern¬ 
 ment by means of the creation of the 
 Bureau of Corporations, the pure 
 food law, and the enlargement of the 
 powers of the Bureau of Tabor and 
 the interstate Commerce Commission 
 have caused a great natural increase 
 in the force of competitive employees. 
 
 It will be observed, however, that 
 during the period from 1883 to 1897 
 there was an increase of 37 per cent, 
 in the number of unclassified em¬ 
 ployees and as the sole distinction be¬ 
 tween them and the classified force 
 was the matter of classification. It is 
 fair to reason that there would have 
 been a similar increase in the classi¬ 
 
 fied force had it been exposed to the 
 spoils system. It is also a fair infer¬ 
 ence to draw that had the spoils sys¬ 
 tem prevailed in Washington during 
 the period from 1896 to the present 
 time there would have been an in¬ 
 crease in the entire governmental 
 force of not less than 2 or 3 per cent, 
 than 20 per cent, of the total force. 
 The most moderate estimate that may 
 therefore be claimed for the system of 
 competition is that it saves to-day one- 
 fifth of the total expense of the sal¬ 
 aries of employees in the Departments 
 at Washington. Some limitations 
 might be placed on this estimate from 
 the occasional firmness of an official 
 and also from the matter of possi¬ 
 bilities because in some cases Depart¬ 
 ments actually have not the room to 
 stand an indefinite increase of force. 
 In the old days, before the passage 
 of the civil service law, it was not un¬ 
 common to find an office so over¬ 
 crowded that desks were provided in 
 the library and in the private offices 
 of the chiefs to accommodate the em¬ 
 ployees whose appointment was de¬ 
 manded by the exigencies of politics. 
 
 The other illustration of the matter 
 of economy occurred in the Civil Ser¬ 
 vice Commission. A branch of this 
 office is called the Rural Carrier Di¬ 
 vision, and it has to do solely with 
 the grading of the papers of all candi¬ 
 dates for the position of rural carrier. 
 This branch of the office has been 
 taken over from the Post Office De¬ 
 partment, being acquired by the Com¬ 
 mission in 1905. When the rural car¬ 
 rier force was first established - , as is 
 frequently the case with newly estab¬ 
 lished forces, a clause was put in the 
 appropriation bill providing that all 
 appointments therein should be made 
 without regard to the civil service law 
 or rules. In this manner this division, 
 which is now in our office, was orig¬ 
 inally appointed under the patronage 
 system. This work is now heavier 
 than it was when it was entirely com¬ 
 posed of persons appointed under that 
 system, but the work is substantially 
 performed by persons who have been 
 selected through the process of com¬ 
 petition. Under the old system the 
 number of persons required to do the 
 
work of this division, which is larger 
 now than it ever was before, was from 
 34 to 46. At present that same work 
 is done by 14 persons; thus illustrat¬ 
 ing the comparative efficiency of the 
 employee secured by patronage and 
 the employee secured by examination, 
 and the comparative economy of the 
 two systems. 
 
 As an illustration of the lack of 
 economy under the old system we 
 may turn to the famous report of the 
 Bureau of Printing and Engraving, 
 made in 1877, wherein it is said: 
 
 We began our investigations on the 
 21st of March, by the oral examina¬ 
 tion of the officers of the Bureau, but 
 before proceeding far it became ap¬ 
 parent that there was a great excess 
 of force employed. Upon reporting 
 this fact to the Secretary we were 
 directed to submit a list of persons 
 whose services could be dispensed 
 with, basing our recommendations 
 solely upon the relative efficiency of 
 the various employees. In the per¬ 
 formance of this duty we required the 
 several chiefs of divisions, in our pres¬ 
 ence and under our instructions, to 
 rate the efficiency of their employees 
 on a scale of 10, having regard to 
 their capacity, industry, moral charac¬ 
 ter and habits. Having ascertained 
 from the statements of the officers of 
 the Bureau the daily amount of work 
 to be done in a given division, and 
 the capacity of an efficient employee 
 therein, we thus determined the num¬ 
 ber of persons required in such di¬ 
 vision. Proceeding in this manner we 
 found that the services of 23 persons, 
 with an annual compensation of $136.- 
 000, could be dispensed with without 
 impairing the efficiency of the Bu¬ 
 reau or changing the then existing 
 methods of doing business. 
 
 Our investigations show that the 
 force of the Bureau has for many 
 years been in excess of the require¬ 
 ments of the work, and that this was 
 the case even when the work was 
 greatest. We are informed and be¬ 
 lieve that the force employed in some 
 divisions was for a number of years 
 together twice as great as was re¬ 
 quired for the proper performance of 
 the work, and that in others it was 
 three times as great as necessary. In 
 
 10 
 
 one of these divisions a sort of plat¬ 
 form had been built underneath the 
 iron roof, about seven feet above the 
 floor, to accommodate the surplus 
 counters. On this shelf, on parts of 
 which a person of ordinary height 
 could not stand erect—deprived of 
 proper ventilation, and exposed in 
 summer to the joint effects of the 
 heated roof above and the fumes of 
 the wetted paper beneath — were 
 placed some thirty or more women 
 for whom room must be found. It 
 now appears that the room was of 
 ample size, without this contrivance, 
 to accommodate all of the persons 
 who had received appointments and 
 really needed; that the surplus force 
 stowed away in the loft was entirely 
 unnecessary; and that some of them, 
 at times, for lack of occupation, whiled 
 away the time in sleep. 
 
 We may also, to show that the 
 spoils system is to-day what it was a 
 generation ago, take up the case of 
 the special investigation of House em¬ 
 ployees, Report of February 28, 1901, 
 wherein it appears that during the 55th 
 Congress the practice prevailed, under 
 a system of appointment by patron¬ 
 age, of systematically paying persons 
 who were absent from employment, 
 even in cases where their duties were 
 such as ought to require their attend¬ 
 ance during the year, and subtracting 
 large sums of money from the pay of 
 clerks to give to the pay of other 
 clerks with a view of equalizing the 
 claims of different members of Con¬ 
 gress to patronage; a process which 
 necessarily implies a taking of money 
 from the Government without ade¬ 
 quate return. See also in the Census 
 of 1900, of which one of its most 
 prominent officials says: 
 
 One consequence of the spoils sys¬ 
 tem as applied to the Twelfth Census, 
 was the employment of an unneces¬ 
 sarily large number of clerks. It was 
 far easier, in my own experience, to 
 obtain a score of additional clerks at 
 an annual cost of from $14,000 to 
 $24,000 than to secure an expenditure 
 of $1,000 for supplies which would 
 save the labor of twenty clerks. 
 Under this system clerical labor costs 
 
rose enormously above the necessary 
 or desirable level for there was no¬ 
 where an effective and undeviating 
 purpose to eliminate wastes of this 
 sort nor the close scrutiny of the 
 methods proposed to be employed 
 which the execution of such a purpose 
 would involve. Both the appropriat¬ 
 ing and the appointing powers seemed 
 rather to favor methods which re¬ 
 quired the maximum number of 
 clerical employees. 
 
 Turning to the third question, that 
 of the removal of the civil service 
 from politics and of the consequent 
 abolition of the control of politics by 
 the officeholders or office-seekers ma¬ 
 chine, the result of the reform in this 
 particular is ; possibly less apparent 
 and less demonstratable than any of 
 the others. This is largely because 
 it has not been extended as yet to the 
 higher government officials or to the 
 civil services of the different states 
 and cities. It is, however, none the 
 less true that much has been accom¬ 
 plished. For instance, the entire com¬ 
 petitive force of the government no 
 longer concerns itself with politics. 
 There may be individual exceptions to 
 this rule, but that they are few in 
 number is indicated by the experience 
 of the Civil Service Commission. 
 Since June, 1907, the Civil Service 
 Commission has had charge of the en¬ 
 forcement of the rule against political 
 activity in the competitive service. 
 During that time there have been to 
 my knowledge not to exceed eight 
 cases serious enough to require in¬ 
 vestigation, one of which terminated 
 in removal, and others in lesser pun¬ 
 ishments such as reprimands, while in 
 one case the charges were proven to 
 be without foundation. As the Com¬ 
 mission has investigated every case 
 submitted to it it is apparent that 
 there cannot be very much activity on 
 the part of those in the competitive 
 service. This, too, is in the year of a 
 presidential nomination. The Presi¬ 
 dent has very wisely held that the rule 
 against political activity cannot be en¬ 
 forced against those not appointed by 
 competition. It is impossible to en¬ 
 force this rule against persons who 
 owe their appointments to politics, and 
 
 who would lose them if they were not 
 active in politics, but so far as the 
 system of competition has been al¬ 
 lowed to extend it has achieved its 
 object. The man who is protected 
 from removal for political reasons and 
 who owes his place to standing in an 
 examination does not care to take any 
 part in politics further than to vote. 
 In 1881 a dispute over the position of 
 Collector of Customs of New York re¬ 
 sulted in the feud in the Republican 
 party which was prominent among the 
 causes which gave the presidency to 
 the Democratic party four years later. 
 How many in this audience Jknow 
 who is the Collector of Customs at 
 New York at present? How many 
 know that there has been a change in 
 that office in the last six months? 
 Why is this? Simply because the 
 Collector’s control over his force in 
 politics has been destroyed. 
 
 i think that this city of Chicago is 
 an instance of the truth of the asser¬ 
 tion that the enforcement of the civil- 
 service law has produced a high grade 
 of politics and brings into political 
 life a higher grade of people, and 
 without going into an embarrassing 
 personal discussion, I think the same 
 thing is true of the Executive part of 
 the national government. The prac¬ 
 tice of handling politics from the pea¬ 
 nut standpoint of regarding it as a 
 game of traffic in offices and contracts 
 with the ultimate result of pecuniary 
 emolument of the successful is neces¬ 
 sarily so revolting to men of intelli¬ 
 gence and character that it will force 
 them to keep out unless compelled 
 by necessity. On the other hand the 
 handling of public appointments with 
 but sole regard for the public good 
 will inevitably raise the character of 
 government, and induce many to 
 seek governmental employment whose 
 character will improve the administra¬ 
 tion. 
 
 Thus we see that the theory of civil 
 service reform has shown itself to be 
 in the proper sense of that word a 
 theory and to be justified by its re¬ 
 sults. The objections made to re¬ 
 form in its incipiency have been in 
 like manner shown to be by practical 
 
experience destitute of any corre¬ 
 spondence to actual effect. Thus, for 
 instance, it was frequently said that 
 confidential positions, of which there 
 are many thousands, could not be 
 filled by examination; the answer to 
 which is afforded by the spectacle of 
 thousands of Federal officials holding 
 their places through examination and 
 promotion, and discharging the most 
 confidential and responsible duties in 
 the service. In the office of the Civil 
 Service Commission at Washington, 
 for example, of the 170 employees 
 probably 95 per cent, have been pro¬ 
 cured by examination. There is no 
 Department of the Government whose 
 proceedings would be of more interest 
 to the newspapers if revealed, and yet 
 I do not believe that in the whole his¬ 
 tory of the Commission any fact has 
 ever gotten out about its transactions 
 except through the Commissioners. 
 A Government official does not need, 
 in most cases, any confidential em¬ 
 ployee. Government business is a 
 matter of public interest and the con¬ 
 fidential employee or private secretary 
 is much more likely to be wanted for 
 purposes of politics than for the doing 
 of the business of the Government. 
 So far as it is necessary to have men 
 who can keep things to themselves 
 and avoid publicity, experience has 
 richly and abundantly demonstrated 
 that they can be gotten by means of 
 examination. It has been repeatedly 
 shown that the man who is appointed 
 by examination and tested by proba- 
 tional appointment is far more re¬ 
 liable, far more honest, and far less 
 likely to be guilty of pecuniary de¬ 
 falcation than the man who has earned 
 his position by services in politics. 
 
 It was said that the establishment 
 of a competitive system would deprive 
 us of the inestimable services of po¬ 
 litical workers, that no one would take 
 any active interest in politics if the 
 services of officials were withdrawn. 
 To this the answer was made and it 
 has been verified by experience, that 
 such activity is only desirable if in¬ 
 spired by zeal for promotion or for the 
 success of a worthy candidate, and 
 that the activity is inspired by the 
 holding or hope of an office might be 
 
 dispensed with without injury to the 
 body politic. 
 
 The enormous change involved in 
 the withdrawal of 165,000 or 185,000 
 classified employees has not apparent¬ 
 ly put an end to campaigns or created 
 any difficulty in carrying them on. 
 The evil predicted has not followed 
 from the retirement of these people 
 from party activity. 
 
 A favorite argument of the advo¬ 
 cates of the system of patronage in 
 the past was the superiority of a pass 
 over a competitive examination. We 
 are nearly all familiar with the prac¬ 
 tice which has shown the futility of 
 the system of pass examinations. 
 The difficulty about them is that 
 there is nothing to restrain the natural 
 kindheartedness of the examining offi¬ 
 cer; the steady pull is in the direc¬ 
 tion of making the examination easier; 
 the candidates’ backers accelerate this 
 tendency and the examination rapidly 
 degenerates into a farce. From 
 March 3, 1897, to March 3, 1898, 112 
 persons selected by the patronage 
 system on the priciple of a division of 
 patronage between the machines of 
 the different States, took the examina¬ 
 tion in the State Department for con¬ 
 sular positions. Of these 112 only one 
 failed to pass. Mr. Root has charac¬ 
 terized these examinations by saying 
 that it was regarded as cruelty to 
 animals to turn anyone down that 
 tried to pass it, and that the standard 
 is so low that no one but a congenital 
 idiot could fail to pass. 
 
 Thus it appears that in the instance 
 of the merit system “wisdom is justi¬ 
 fied in her children.” The applica¬ 
 tion in practice of the theory laid 
 down by the early civil service re¬ 
 formers and so aptly cited by Curtis 
 has shown that all that was claimed 
 of it was true, and all the objections 
 made against it are baseless. 
 
 We can but believe, so long as we 
 believe in the progress of society 
 and of human intelligence, that this 
 movement is destined to spread until 
 it has covered every State and munici¬ 
 pal service in the Union, and every 
 position in the service of the Gov¬ 
 ernment except those in whose choice 
 the political element is also neces- 
 
sary. We do not contend that higher 
 officials can all be appointed by com¬ 
 petitive examination, though many 
 may be, but the principle of appoint¬ 
 ment for public service as distin¬ 
 guished from for party end, and ser¬ 
 vice so long as the public good is ad¬ 
 vanced by that service, will, we be¬ 
 lieve, ultimately prevail in all offices 
 not directly concerned with political 
 questions. Before another generation 
 
 has passed away the changing of post¬ 
 masters or collectors of customs, or 
 district attornies with every change in 
 the party in power will be as anti¬ 
 quated and as absurd to the eyes of 
 the people of this country as are to 
 us at present the barbarities of the old 
 English common law or the atrocities 
 and absurdities of the system of 
 slavery. 
 
 13 
 
 i 
 
 
 kj 
 
 -«* *-4k 
 
NATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE REFORM LEAGUE 
 
 PRESIDENT: 
 
 JOSEPH H. CHOATE. 
 
 VICE-PRESIDENTS: 
 
 GROVER CLEVELAND, 
 CHARLES W. ELIOT, 
 HARRY A. GARFIELD, 
 DANIEL C. GILMAN, 
 ARTHUR T. HADLEY, 
 HENRY CHARLES LEA, 
 SETH LOW, 
 
 FRANKLIN MACVEAGH, 
 GEORGE A. POPE, 
 
 HENRY C. POTTER, D.D., 
 P. J. RYAN, D.D., 
 
 MOOR FIELD STOREY, 
 THOMAS N. STRONG, 
 HERBERT WELSH. 
 
 SECRETARY: 
 
 TREASURER: 
 
 ELLIOT H. GOODWIN. 
 
 A. S. FRISSELL. 
 
 ASS’T SECY.: 
 
 ALBERT DE ROODE. 
 
 COUNCIL: 
 
 RICHARD HENRY DANA, Chairman. 
 
 WILLIAM A. AIKEN, 
 
 FREDERIC ALMY, 
 
 ARTHUR H. BROOKS, 
 
 CHARLES C. BURLINGHAM, 
 GEORGE BURNHAM JR., 
 
 SILAS W. BURT, 
 
 JOHN A. BUTLER, 
 
 EDWARD CARY, 
 
 EVERETT COLBY, 
 
 CHARLES COLLINS, 
 
 WILLIAM E. CUSHING, 
 NATHANIEL HENCHMAN DAVIS, 
 HORACE E. DEMING, 
 
 ROBERT G. DODGE, 
 
 JOHN JOY EDSON, 
 
 JOHN A. FAIRLIE, 
 
 HENRY W. FARNAM, 
 
 CYRUS D. FOSS, JR., 
 
 WILLIAM DUDLEY FOULKE, 
 RICHARD WATSON GILDER, 
 CHARLES NOBLE GREGORY, 
 HENRY W. HARDON, 
 
 H. BARTON JACOBS, 
 
 ROBERT D. JENIvS, 
 
 WILLIAM V. KELLEN, 
 
 JOHN F. LEE, 
 
 WILLIAM G. LOW, 
 
 GEORGE McANENY, 
 
 HENRY L. McCUNE, 
 
 HARRY J. MILLIGAN, 
 
 WILLIAM B. MOULTON, 
 SAMUEL IT. ORDWAY, 
 WILLIAM POTTS, 
 
 JOHN READ, 
 
 H. O. REIK, 
 
 CHARLES RICHARDSON, 
 HENRY A. RICHMOND, 
 EDWARD M. SHEPARD, 
 
 F. L. SIDDONS, 
 
 NELSON S. SPENCER, 
 
 LUCIUS B. SWIFT, 
 
 W. J. TREMBATH, 
 
 HENRY VAN KLEECK, 
 
 W. W. VAUGHAN, 
 
 EVERETT P. WHEELER, 
 CHARLES B. WILBY, 
 
 ANSLEY WILCOX, 
 
 C. D. WILLARD, 
 
 FREDERICK C. WINKLER, 
 
 R. FRANCIS WOOD, 
 
 CLINTON ROGERS WOODRUFF, 
 MORRILL WYMAN, JR. 
 
 Offices of the League, 
 
 No. 79 WALL ST., NEW YORK. 
 
 14 
 

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ■ 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
.'V ■ > “ 
 
 
 k 
 
 
 ■ ■■ . ' ■■ : .:J> 
 
 •- • - 
 
 r ■■■■ - > 
 
 — - j-. — '• '•*' 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 “V 
 
 Jr* 
 
 -• 
 
 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 r- 
 
 
 <x 
 
 
 M 
 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 - ■ .* 
 
 
 
 | 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ;