assembly creating that department became effective July 1, 1913. The necessities of the new department required that all of its one hundred and forty employees, with the exception of eight, be high class engineers, draftsmen, rodmen, chainmen and tracers. It was not possible for the commission to take one step toward filling these positions until after June 12th, the date of the approval of the appropriation ordinance. Your commission is able to report, however, that at no time since the creation of that department has it ever been unable to fill all requisitions made by the appointing power. Eightysix appointments have actually been made and eligible lists have long since been prepared to cover every remaining vacancy. The quality of the work done was evidenced by the fact that the director of that department made his appointments almost in the exact order of the standing of the men upon the list. In fact this great test of the merit system has been the feature of the work of the Commission for the year 1913.

An effort on the part of the administration has also been made to classify and grade the positions in the city's service and to introduce a system of efficiency records, which will simplify the question of promotions within the service. Considerable work has been done in this direction, but no definite action has as yet been taken.

In the 1913 session of the legislature, an effort was made to repeal the Philadelphia law or at least modify it in such a way as to remove from it the terrors which it now holds for the average political worker. Fortunately, these attacks were met and defeated although an effort on the part of our Association to secure the extention of the merit system to the state was likewise defeated. Our Association looks forward to a real future for civil service administration in the state, a future the basis of which will be the accomplishments of the present administration. We have shown the people of Philadelphia what the merit system can do in the way of securing good men and what it should do in the way of giving each applicant for appointment a square deal, and we are confident that a standard such as this can not be readily overthrown.

Our experience in the federal service in Philadelphia warrants us in believing that civil service regulations once established are not readily abandoned. In Philadelphia we have from five to six thousand employees of the

federal service in the civil departments, and notwithstanding the fact that one of the most spirited and vigorous campaigns ever waged in the ranks of a party was carried on within the democratic party of Pennsylvania prior to the primaries of last May, the post office, the customs service and the mint have all three weathered the storm comfortably, and with few exceptions, not only kept the employees out of the fight, but failed to make any marked change in the personnel of the departments in order to build up the forces of the administration. The new heads of the several departments have also been remarkably self-restrained in the control of their departments prior to the last election.

Throughout the state, however, particularly in connection with second and third class post offices, the situation is by no means so satisfactory. Last spring an investigation conducted by one of the newspapers in Philadelphia, afterwards verified by the Association, ascertained the fact that candidates for third class post offices were very frequently called upon to guarantee to pay a certain amount towards the expenses of the democratic party county committee, and in fact one county committee chairman stated ingenuously that he was told by his congressman to interview a number of candidates for certain third class post offices in the county, paying about thirteen or fourteen hundred dollars a year and that he found many candidates all decidedly eager to secure a place, so eager in fact that they swallowed his suggestion, that they guarantee to pay a portion of their salary to the democratic county committee, voraciously. With some shrewdness, he decided that a promise made before was not necessarily equivalent to execution after appointment. So in some cases he secured cash deposits and in others he drew up a curious form of agreement wherein the party of the first part promised and agreed to pay so much money to the chairman of the democratic county committee upon such and such a date in case of his nomination and appointment to such and such a post office. A Philadelphia newspaper made quite a story out of this action, and probably prevented further ingenuous confessions, although it is presumed that third class post

masters still contribute with liberality to the party funds. In conclusion we may therefore report for Pennsylvania that we have made a beginning in civil service reform, both in so far as the adoption of statutes is concerned and the enforcement of those statutes. Notwithstanding these gains, the fight has just begun. The ground we have gained must be fought for to be kept, and the battle between the forces of reform in the civil service and the forces that cry for the old spoils system is still being waged with variable success. A crucial time will come when the incoming legislature meets next month and when in November, 1915, we in Philadelphia elect a new city administration. We are optimistic, but not yet ready to shout that the victory is won.

Glenway Maxon, of Milwaukee, presented the report for the Wisconsin Association:

The work of the state civil service commission of Wisconsin is increasing year by year, both in respect to the volume and importance of the business that comes before it for determination. This is due in part to the fact that Wisconsin is governed largely by commissions. which are gradually extending their sphere of action and increasing the number of employees. Interesting and new questions arise for the first time before the commission for determination. An instance of this was very recently presented to the civil service commission in the case of an application on the part of the commissioner of insurance who desired "to make a thorough investigation of state properties under the charge of the state board of control with regard to the protection of the property and occupants against danger by fire, and claimed that for this purpose it was necessary to employ expert engineers who are specifically familiar with the subject," and that "he desired to appoint two men outside of the state connected with the Independence Inspection Bureau of Philadelphia for this purpose." It was also claimed by the insurance commissioner that owing to the peculiar and expert nature of the work desired to be performed that there were no men qualified for such work available in Wisconsin. This request was not granted, but the secretary and chief examiner of the

civil service commission gave notice of a public hearing to consider the exemption from competitive examination of all positions as insurance examiners in the office of a state insurance commissioner for occasional temporary service, where compensation is in fees paid by the insurance commissioner.

The Wisconsin Civil Service League appointed a committee consisting of Messrs. N. P. Hulst, C. W. Norris, J. R. Bradford and the writer to attend the hearing. This committee appeared before the state civil service commission and raised the question as to whether the law was sufficiently broad to authorize the employment of the proposed experts and the expenditure of the money.

Upon this question the attorney general under date of Sept. 21, 1914, rendered a written opinion to the secretary of the state civil service commission in which it is stated: "The question thus propounded is really whether the insurance commission possesses the statutory power to do the work it proposes. This would seem to be a question with which the civil service commission is not especially concerned. That would seem to be a question. that may properly be raised by the secretary of state when it comes to audit the salary of the men so employed if they shall be employed." * "I cannot see that the interest of the civil service commission in the matter is any greater than it would be if the insurance commissioner had called for a certified list of stenographic or other clerical help."

*

It was suggested by our committee that such a rule would prove pernicious in practice and that the civil service commissioners ought in the first instance to determine whether there was an authorized position to be filled before taking action in the matter.

Thereupon a further opinion was requested and furnished by the attorney general to the effect that there was implied power in the act to employ these experts and this opinion was based upon the following provision of the statute: "For carrying out the provisions of section 1978a, 1978b, 1978c and this section, the commission with the approval of the governor may employ such assistance as necessary and fix their compensation." The sec

tions referred to do not specifically authorize this work to be done nor the money expended.

We were overruled and the experts were employed by the insurance commissioner to make the detailed drawings and specifications of fire protection of certain public buildings. It was conceded that the legislature had made no provision for carrying into effect the proposed improvements. That the expenses of the expert examination would be in the neighborhood of $7500 and possibly more and that the service would extend over a considerable period of time. The question thus presented is one of vital importance in the administration of the law.

There being no express authority for the employment and expenditure of the money, we believe it a dangerous doctrine to hold that the civil service commission must act when the application is made for the appointment of so-called experts irrespective of the question whether there is a position to be filled. The question whether the civil service commission should not first satisfy itself, that the law created the position to be filled and also provided the necessary funds therefor, was squarely presented in this application of the insurance commissioner, and the civil service commission seemed to be of the opinion that it was not their duty to determine these questions in the first instance. Whether right or wrong, we believe that this is a lax and dangerous method of procedure, and if the law is defective in this respect it should be amended. It requires but little intelligence to comprehend that a state governed so largely by commissions as is the state of Wisconsin, necessitating the employment of a large and expensive force to carry out the provisions of law applicable thereto, that such employment and expenditure should not rest upon a mere naked implied authority. Such governmental procedure trenches too closely upon the legislative power of the state. It ignores the great underlying principles of a government like ours, republic in form. It leaves room for arbitrary and capricious action, and authority to enforce the law in one instance and suspend it in another. Such administration of the law is liable to become autocratic, uncertain and arbitrary in its nature. So-called