REPORT OF THE COUNCIL.

TO THE NATIONAL CIVIL SERVICE REFORM LEAGUE:

THE

'HE most notable event of the year in the United States is the successful revolt against boss rule in politics, exemplified in so many parts of the country at once. As the inspiration to civil service reform is to free the country from the boss, this event is a source of great joy to us who have labored so long in the good cause. But with our satisfaction, there comes to all serious minded men the fear lest the people, content with victory, will lapse into inactivity. Cold weather checks the yellow fever, but is nothing to be done to prepare for the following summer? We have seen similar revolts before, with no permanent improvement. We have turned out a Tweed, and in came a Croker; out went Croker, and on moved a Murphy. We abolished some particular boss, we removed the man, but we kept the conditions which made the man what he was.

Something, then, ought to be done. The question for thoughtful men is to decide what that something is that will make the results permanent. Does that something consist in giving larger or smaller powers to the executive, or in unicameral councils, or in the presence of Cabinet ministers in Congress, or more or less self-government in cities, or in the selection of aldermen at large or by districts? The boss has flourished under each of these conditions, under Walpole in England, with ministerial presence in Parliament, and in America under every form of municipal government seriously proposed. Cities abused their power so that, at one time, the policy was to restrict self-government. Now the tendency is to enlarge it. Corruption is just as rife with single chambers as with double, long or short terms of mayors, elections of aldermen by districts or at large. Good as some of these and other measures of the sort may be, they do not

go deep enough. They do not touch the springs of action; they do not affect the motives of those who go into politics for what they can get out of politics. An analysis of the boss system, a microscopic observation of the habits of the microbe of our political epidemic, shows clearly that the boss disease is spread and fed by the misuse of the offices and of the contracts, jobs, etc., in the control of the offices.

This has been our Gospel, and never has it been better illustrated, or more clearly proved, than in the Philadelphia overturn of this year. On May 18th, the gas ordinance was passed by Councils, after most vigorous protests and appeals of the representatives of public sentiment, against the advice of Mayor Weaver, and amidst cries of "Thieves," "Robbers," "Grafters," from the spectators, by majorities of more than eight to one. The machine, on the same day, flouted the power of the Mayor by defeating almost unanimously nine of his vetoes. On the 23d of May the power of the ring was broken. What had happened? Mayor Weaver, on the 23d, dismissed the Director of Public Safety and the Director of Public Works, the two greatest dispensers of patronage, and appointed in their places anti-machine men. He took away the offices from the machine, and the machine immediately collapsed. In addition to this dramatic proof of what feeds and sustains the boss system, we have the words of those who were behind Mayor Weaver in his gallant rout of Philadelphia "bosses"; which are, "The events referred to have made it absolutely clear that the success of grafters and boodlers in American cities depends upon their control of the appointments."

* * * *

Now is the time to emphasize the fact that the more conspicuous evils of awarding public contracts and franchises, depositing State funds with political banks, holding up business corporations, or collecting blackmail from law breakers, are evils which have their root in the command of the army of office-holders working in politics to control nominations and elections. For who would pay blackmail to the boss or make large contributions to him, unless the boss controlled the public policies, and

how can he control these except by controlling the nominations and elections, and how does he control them except by his subservient army of office-holders, and the added resources that this power gives him?

For the purpose of securing the extension of the merit. system, this is an opportune time to call attention to the improvements in the examinations made by the various Commissions, rendering the examinations better tests of fitness. For some examples,-in the examinations for forest rangers, practical tests in the field, including shooting at targets with rifle and pistol, have been instituted. For selecting inspectors where accurate knowledge of particular kinds of goods is required, the candidates have been tested in grading, classifying, etc., actual samples of the goods they would have to inspect. Where special experience is needed for various positions, an inquiry into the past work of the candidates has tested satisfactorily the possession of such experience. Even executive and organizing ability of a high order has been secured by statements of the candidates' past experience in addition to essays on the best ways of conducting the bureau, as well as applying tests to determine the possession of the necessary scientific, or other special knowledge and training.

Within the past year the United States Civil Service Commission has filled, with the greatest success, such positions as administrative biologist and bacteriological chemist in the Department of Agriculture; chief of division of chemistry in the Public Health and Marine Hospital service; consulting engineers for sewer and water works for the Philippine service; and tariff expert in the Department of Commerce and Labor. In Massachusetts, the State Commission has provided Superintendents of Streets for some of the smaller cities. Mayor Daly of Cambridge has filled some excepted positions of heads of departments by competition, while the most conspicuous case has been the appointment by Mayor Weaver of Philadelphia, since the overturn, of the Superintendent of Streets for that great city, by competition, securing the services of an eminent and experienced engineer, who had no political backing whatsoever. This is of the utmost im

portance to our reform, as it shows how higher positions, now generally exempted, may be taken out of politics, even when these higher positions cannot be filled by promotion for lack of fit material in subordinate positions. Think what it means if, for the great municipal departments, we can secure heads with brains and experience, free from political pull! They may then award and enforce contracts without fear or favor, and thus the double graft of patronage and favored contracts would be stopped.

Too many of the friends of civil service reform have been unaware of these advances in the system of competitive tests, so that, when in positions of influence, they have assumed that all appointments requiring special qualifications, experience or ability must be made outside of the civil service rules. Again, the questions of restrictions. on removals and regulations of promotions, which cause us so much doubt and trouble as long as heads of large offices and bureaus are appointed for politics, would go far to settle themselves if those heads were on a tenure of merit, and not of political subserviency.

It has long been believed that many positions, exempted on account of special qualifications, such for example as deputy collectors of internal revenue, have been filled on the suggestion and through the influence. of the very interests to be inspected, and the positions are held on the same tenure. The recent insurance investigations furnish illustrations. The former insurance superintendent of New York, James F. Peirce, was attorney for the Mutual Life before appointment, and an employee of one of the officers of the Equitable was made inspector, both to watch the very companies by whose favor they undoubtedly got and held their places.

During the past year, in the Federal civil service, there have been sixty-three cases of special exceptions by executive order as against forty-two last year. Of these sixty-three cases eleven were appointments wholly from the outside; nineteen were appointments after temporary service that had come to an end; seven were temporary appointments made permanent; seventeen were appointments to competitive after long service in non-competi

tive places; and nine were reinstatements. In the language of the resolutions adopted by the League at its last annual meeting, the Council "feels that it is very dangerous, except in cases of most pressing necessity, to suspend the law or rules in the case of any competitive position where the candidate is unable to show his superior merit and fitness in open competition no less than to exempt a place or class of places unnecessarily." In examining the reasons for these special exceptions several of them impress us to have been made on the basis of charity rather than merit. A striking instance of this was the re-appointment through special exemption of a letter carrier dismissed for intoxication (order of March 2, 1905). The grounds for the application for a special exemption in this case as disclosed by the record were three: first, that the letter carrier had reformed; second, that he was the father of fifteen children; and third, that the person who made the application would be "very much gratified" by the re-instatement.

Besides these sixty-three cases of special exceptions, thirty-three appointments, made from time to time in the Indian warehouse service contrary to the civil service rules, and several of them in the face of protests of the Civil Service Commission, have recently been covered into the service by the recommendation of the Commission itself. The reason stated for this is that to discharge all these persons at once would cripple the service.

The Isthmian Canal service was classified at a time when that service was being organized. It was anticipated that so many appointments to be made at once for so distant a scene, with a varied service, would cause a great strain on the resources of the Civil Service Commission, and so it proved. Approximately 1,000 excepted appointments were made for want of eligible lists, and 105 more for which there were nominally eligibles of similar grades, but not tested for the special qualifications desired. These figures are made up to the end of October. From November 15, 1904, to July 1, 1905, only 361 regular appointments through competitive examinations were made in the Isthmian service. All the excepted