1.Civil Service Reform in Great Britain Dorman B.Eaton The undertaking to point out the bearing of the reform measures of Great Britain upon administrative questions in the United States has.the author trusts been in large part perfomed as the work has proceeded;and perhaps few suggestions can now be made which have not already occurred to the reader. The mere fact that any given principlesor methods of political action have been found salutary in one country,is by no means a sufficient reason for introducing them into another.nor is it often that corresponding relations among officers,or between the officials and the people,will be found practicable in any two countries.But the probability that they may be naturally inreases with all that is in common in race,language and religion,in laws,institutions,and civilization And,therefore,notwithstanding the people of Great Britain have much more than any other people in common with ourselves,the mere success of her reform measures within her own borders had not been accepted as a reason why we should find them equally salutary.and hence ther infuence has been consiered in its bearings upon liberty,commuic general dcation public morality,and the complicated and essential relations of great parties inafree State.In the opening chapter,attention was called to the extent to whicho fathers incorporated into their new structure the principles of the British.It is worthy of our notice that the question now presented is not so much a question about adopting processes and methods as it is about approving certain great principles which embody a theory of political morality,of official obligation,of qual rights in govermen It was the principlerather than the mere methods of the division of departments,of the independence of the judicry. of free.parliamentary debate,of representative institution,of trial by jury,of the habeas corpus,of the common law,of personal rights,of the subordination of the military to the ivil power,which we adopted in our regional constitution.The question now before us is,whether the nation which has maintained,as faithfully as we have,all these great foundations of liberty,still equally fundamental in the two countries,may not now be able to tender us other principles worthy ofour adoption,which she has developed in perfecting the vast and complicated operations in her civil affairs during the period in which-absorbed by the intrests of new States and and by the many matters peculiar to a young nation-we have given little thought to the practical working of
1 1. Civil Service Reform in Great Britain Dorman B. Eaton The undertaking to point out the bearing of the reform measures of Great Britain upon administrative questions in the United States has, the author trusts, been in large part performed as the work has proceeded; and perhaps few suggestions can now be made which have not already occurred to the reader. The mere fact that any given principles or methods of political action have been found salutary in one country, is by no means a sufficient reason for introducing them into another; nor is it often that corresponding relations among officers, or between the officials and the people, will be found practicable in any two countries. But the probability that they may be naturally increases with all that is in common in race, language and religion, in laws, institutions, and civilization. And, therefore, notwithstanding the people of Great Britain have so much more than any other people in common with ourselves, the mere success of her reform measures within her own borders had not been accepted as a reason why we should find them equally salutary; and hence their influence has been considered in its bearings upon liberty, common justice, general education, public morality, and the complicated and essential relations of great parties in a free State. In the opening chapter, attention was called to the extent to which our fathers incorporated into their new structure the principles of the British constitution. It is worthy of our notice that the question now presented is not so much a question about adopting processes and methods as it is about approving certain great principles which embody a theory of political morality, of official obligation, of equal rights and common justice in government. It was the principle, rather than the mere methods, of the division of government into three great departments, of the independence of the judiciary, of free, parliamentary debate, of representative institution, of trial by jury, of the habeas corpus, of the common law, of personal rights, of the subordination of the military to the civil power, which we adopted in our regional constitution. The question now before us is, whether the nation which has maintained, as faithfully as we have, all these great foundations of liberty, still equally fundamental in the two countries, may not now be able to tender us other principles worthy of our adoption, which she has developed in perfecting the vast and complicated operations in her civil affairs during the period in which-absorbed by the interests of new States and territories and by the many matters peculiar to a young nation –we have given little thought to the practical working of
government?Our fathers did not borrow so much from the mother country because the two peoples had kindred blood poke the same language and gathered inspiration from the sme literature,but because England,being at that time the freest and most enightened of theol nations,and her higher precedents having been forged in the furnace fires of liberty and sanctioned by its saints and martyrs,were best adapted to our needs and most naturally commanded the confidence of our early statesmen.Now,as then,the two great English-speaking nations maintain their original precedence in freedom and justice.For the United States,even yet allows atrue freedom of debate and of the press-makes the affords a safe asylum for the victims of despotismrsecuresan efficient protection toevery citizen without the aid of bayonetsr the menace of policemen bearing deadly weapons?Still after all such general reflections have had their true weight there remain the direct questions Has the new system been adequately tested?Is it adapted toour constitutions and social life?Is it republican in spirit and consistent with the practical administration of goverment underou institutions?Have we the public intelig and virtue which warrant the attempt to carry forward such areform? Some of these questions,I must think,have been sufficiently answered,if indeed it were possible to hesitate as to the answer to be given;and the others can be more intelligently considered if we have distinctly before our minds the principles and conclusions which have ecome accepted in the later experience of Great Britain.They may be briefly stated as follows: 1.Public office creates a relation of trust and duty of a kind which requires all authority and influence pertaining to it to be exercised with the same absolute conformity to moral standards,to the prit of the and the laws.and to the commn of the which may be insisted upon in the use of public money or any other common property of the people,and, therefore,whatever difficulty may attend the practical application of the rule of duty.it is identically the sm whether it be appliedtoopertycdisretiodisregard cmm interestsor to grant official favors to personsor to parties. 2.So far as any right is involved,in filling offices,it is the right of the people to have the worthiest citizens in the public service for the general welfare,and the privilege of sharing the honors and profits of holding office appertains equally to every citizen,in proportion to his measure of character and capacity which qualify him for such service 3.the ability,attainments,and character requisite for the fit discharge of official duties of any
2 government? Our fathers did not borrow so much from the mother country because the two peoples had kindred blood, spoke the same language and gathered inspiration from the same literature, but because England, being at that time the freest and most enlightened of the old nations, and her higher precedents having been forged in the furnace fires of liberty and sanctioned by its saints and martyrs, were best adapted to our needs and most naturally commanded the confidence of our early statesmen. Now, as then, the two great English-speaking nations maintain their original precedence in freedom and justice. For the United States, even yet allows a true freedom of debate and of the press-makes the affords a safe asylum for the victims of despotism-or secures an efficient protection to every citizen without the aid of bayonets or the menace of policemen bearing deadly weapons? Still, after all such general reflections have had their true weight, there remain the direct questions: Has the new system been adequately tested? Is it adapted to our constitutions and social life? Is it republican in spirit and consistent with the practical administration of government under our institutions? Have we the public intelligence and virtue which warrant the attempt to carry forward such a reform? Some of these questions, I must think, have been sufficiently answered, if indeed it were possible to hesitate as to the answer to be given; and the others can be more intelligently considered if we have distinctly before our minds the principles and conclusions which have become accepted in the later experience of Great Britain. They may be briefly stated as follows: 1. Public office creates a relation of trust and duty of a kind which requires all authority and influence pertaining to it to be exercised with the same absolute conformity to moral standards, to the spirit of the constitution and the laws, and to the common interests of the people, which may be insisted upon in the use of public money or any other common property of the people; and, therefore, whatever difficulty may attend the practical application of the rule of duty, it is identically the same whether it be applied to property or to official discretion to disregard common interests or to grant official favors to persons or to parties. 2. So far as any right is involved, in filling offices, it is the right of the people to have the worthiest citizens in the public service for the general welfare; and the privilege of sharing the honors and profits of holding office appertains equally to every citizen, in proportion to his measure of character and capacity which qualify him for such service. 3. the ability, attainments, and character requisite for the fit discharge of official duties of any
kind.inother words,the personal merits of the candidate-are in themselves the highest cam upon an office. 4.Party goverment and the ary activity of partiesare not superseded,but they are made purer and more efficient by the merit system of offce.which brings larger capacity and higher character to their support. 5.Government by parties is enfeebled and debased by reliance upon a partisan ystem of appointments and removals,and for its ifeand sautary needful for the party majority to select,as the representative of its views and the executors of its policy, the few high officers with whom rests the power to direct the national affairs and to instruct and keep in the line of their duty the whole body of their subordinates through whose administrative work that poliey is 6.Patronage in the hands of members of the legislature,which originated ina usurpation of executive functions,increases the expenses of administration,is degrading and demoralizing to those who possess itis disastrous to legislation,tends to impair the and stability of the government:and it cannot withstand the criticism of an intelligent people when they fairly comprehend its character and consequences. 7.Examinations(incontio with investigations of character)may be so conducted as to ascertain,with far greater certainty than by any other means,the persons who are the most fit for the public seviceand the worthiest thus disclosed may be selected for the public service by a just and non-partisan method,which the most enlightened public opinion will heartily approve. 8.Open competition presents at once the most just and practicable means of supplying fit persons for appointment.It is proved to have given the best public servants,it makes an end of patronage;and,besides being based on equal rights and common justice,it has been found to be the surest safeguard against both partisan coron and officia favoritism 9.Such methods.which leave to parties and party government their true functions in unimpaired vigor,tend to reduce manipulation,intrigue,and every form of corruption in politics to their smallest proportions.They also reward learning give more importance to character and principles and make political ifemore attractive toall worthy citizen 10.Regarded as a whole,the new system has raised the ambition and advanced both the self-respect and the popular estimation of those in the public service,while it has encouraged 3
3 kind,-in other words, the personal merits of the candidate-are in themselves the highest claim upon an office. 4. Party government and the salutary activity of parties are not superseded, but they are made purer and more efficient, by the merit system of office, which brings larger capacity and higher character to their support. 5. Government by parties is enfeebled and debased by reliance upon a partisan system of appointments and removals; and for its most vigorous life and salutary influence, it is only needful for the party majority to select, as the representative of its views and the executors of its policy, the few high officers with whom rests the power to direct the national affairs, and to instruct and keep in the line of their duty the whole body of their subordinates through whose administrative work that policy is to be carried into effect. 6. Patronage in the hands of members of the legislature, which originated in a usurpation of executive functions, increases the expenses of administration, is degrading and demoralizing to those who possess it, is disastrous to legislation, tends to impair the counterpoise and stability of the government; and it cannot withstand the criticism of an intelligent people when they fairly comprehend its character and consequences. 7. Examinations (in connection with investigations of character)may be so conducted as to ascertain, with far greater certainty than by any other means, the persons who are the most fit for the public service; and the worthiest thus disclosed may be selected for the public service by a just and non-partisan method, which the most enlightened public opinion will heartily approve. 8. Open competition presents at once the most just and practicable means of supplying fit persons for appointment. It is proved to have given the best public servants; it makes an end of patronage; and, besides being based on equal rights and common justice, it has been found to be the surest safeguard against both partisan coercion and official favoritism. 9. Such methods, which leave to parties and party government their true functions in unimpaired vigor, tend to reduce manipulation, intrigue, and every form of corruption in politics to their smallest proportions. They also reward learning, give more importance to character and principles and make political life more attractive to all worthy citizens. 10. Regarded as a whole, the new system has raised the ambition and advanced both the self-respect and the popular estimation of those in the public service, while it has encouraged
general education,arrested demoralizing solicitation for office,and promoted economy,efficiency. and fidelity in public affairs. 11.A system is entirely practicable under which official salaries shall increase during the more active yeas of life,and through which a retiring allowance is retained to be paid upon the officer leaving the public service;and such a system appears to contribute to economy and fidelity in administration 12.Open competition is as fatal to all the conditions of a bureaucracy,as it is to patronage. nepotism and every form of favoritism,in the public service. 13.The merit system,by raising the character and capacity of the subordinate service,and by accustoming the people to consider personal worth and sound principles rather than selfish interest and adroit management,as the controlling elements of success in politics.has also invigorated national patrioism,raised the standard of statesmanship,and caused political leaders tolook more to the better sentiments and the higher intelligence for support. To the othr considerations which give importance to administrative abuses this must be added:that they are the most permanent known topolitics Having theirtimatesouren the selfishness of human nature,they grow wherever ambition,the love of gain,or partisan zeal are not effectively restrained.Favored by the imprfections of all human governments and incidents of their daily operation,they are.in their as as abiding as government itself.It is in the struggles for office,and the opportunities for gain in the exercise of official power,that selfishness. deception,and partisan zeal have their everlasting contest with virtue,patriotism,and duty.It is in that s that statesmen and patriots and intrigers,the the vena office seeker,all the high and al the low influences of political life,meet face to face,and by the balance of power,for good for evil,give character to politics and determine the morality of nations,the questions raised by that contest,and the methods by which politicians seek their solutionare much the same and are equaly vital under every form of representative goverment From generation to generation,from century to century,partisans and self-seeking and corrup men of all sorts employ much the same means to make office-getting and administration serve their ends.If we go back over the administration of a century.inany enlightened State.we find the abuses with which statesmen and patriots have strugged if a litte different in fom,yet in substance much the same.Whether a president or a king be at the head of the government. 4
4 general education, arrested demoralizing solicitation for office, and promoted economy, efficiency, and fidelity in public affairs. 11. A system is entirely practicable under which official salaries shall increase during the more active yea 日 s of life, and through which a retiring allowance is retained to be paid upon the officer leaving the public service; and such a system appears to contribute to economy and fidelity in administration. 12. Open competition is as fatal to all the conditions of a bureaucracy, as it is to patronage, nepotism and every form of favoritism, in the public service. 13. The merit system, by raising the character and capacity of the subordinate service, and by accustoming the people to consider personal worth and sound principles, rather than selfish interest and adroit management, as the controlling elements of success in politics, has also invigorated national patriotism, raised the standard of statesmanship, and caused political leaders to look more to the better sentiments and the higher intelligence for support. To the other considerations which give importance to administrative abuses this must be added: that they are the most permanent known to politics. Having their ultimate source in the selfishness of human nature, they grow wherever ambition, the love of gain, or partisan zeal are not effectively restrained. Favored by the imperfections of all human governments and incidents of their daily operation, they are, in their causes, as abiding as government itself. It is in the struggles for office, and the opportunities for gain in the exercise of official power, that selfishness, deception, and partisan zeal have their everlasting contest with virtue, patriotism, and duty. It is in that contest that statesmen and demagogues, patriots and intriguers, the good citizen and the venal office seeker, all the high and al the low influences of political life, meet face to face, and by the balance of power, for good or for evil, give character to politics and determine the morality of nations, the questions raised by that contest, and the methods by which politicians seek their solution, are much the same and are equally vital under every form of representative government. From generation to generation, from century to century, partisans and self-seeking and corrupt men of all sorts employ much the same means to make office-getting and administration serve their ends. If we go back over the administration of a century, in any enlightened State, we find the abuses with which statesmen and patriots have struggled, if a little different in form, yet in substance much the same. Whether a president or a king be at the head of the government
whether the higher branch of the legislature be electiver hereditary,make little difference in the administrative abuses or in their perilous tendency.Our civil service abuses,as I have already explained,are in substance but a repetition of those of the other enlightened nations.As a people we have cherished no more complete and disastrous delusion than that which has led us to think that the just principles of our constitution and social life have relieved us from dangers growing out of corrupt administration.Human nature has not been changed by republican institutions. Good government does not come from neglect,from conceit,from party zeal,even in a republic If,from the inveterate permanency and peril of administrative abuses,we turn to the other that every generation,every decade,amos every year,has had its peculiar policy,its temporary inerests its absorbing issues,domesticr foreign.The highway of progress is marked by the ever changing procession of subjects each thought to be paramount in its day.Even from our short history,a long list of forgotten questions,each most absorbing for a time,oudbe gathered.But at all times and everywhere,the questions-How tobring honest and capable men into office high and low?How to secure economy and fidelity in administration? How to prevent officil authority from being prostituted to partisan and selfish ends?-have been subjects of serious and increasing difficulty.Whether considered in that light or not,they have really been problems than which none have at and so vitlly conered the prosperity and the morality of the nation What other questions,among all those which have arisen in our politics,have so steadily grown in importance?What question to-day presents issues more difficut whichare of more anxiety and thoughtful tins than this?How can we so administer the government that its daily operations shall not develop infidelity and corruptio fatal aliketoal the virtues of official and privatelife? However the past may be excused,we can hardly find in the future a justification for a continued neglect of the science of administration which,as we have seen,the statesmen of every other enlightened nation have made one of the paramount studies of politics For surely it is not the increase of wealth,the growth of great cities,or the advance of population that will purify the fountains of virtue r make the problems of goverment easier.When,perhaps in the lifetime of persons now living.the residents of Washington holding places in the public service shall exceed her present population;when the country shall contain three hundred millions of people,of which 5
5 whether the higher branch of the legislature be elective or hereditary, make little difference in the administrative abuses or in their perilous tendency. Our civil service abuses, as I have already explained, are in substance but a repetition of those of the other enlightened nations. As a people, we have cherished no more complete and disastrous delusion than that which has led us to think that the just principles of our constitution and social life have relieved us from dangers growing out of corrupt administration. Human nature has not been changed by republican institutions. Good government does not come from neglect, from conceit, or from party zeal, even in a republic. If, from the inveterate permanency and peril of administrative abuses, we turn to the other great questions of politics, we see that every generation, every decade, almost every year, has had its peculiar policy, its temporary interests, its absorbing issues, domestic or foreign. The highway of progress is marked by the ever changing procession of subjects each thought to be paramount in its day. Even from our short history, a long list of forgotten questions, each most absorbing for a time, could be gathered. But at all times and everywhere, the questions-How to bring honest and capable men into office, high and low? How to secure economy and fidelity in administration? How to prevent official authority from being prostituted to partisan and selfish ends?-have been subjects of serious and increasing difficulty. Whether considered in that light or not, they have really been problems than which none have at once so constantly and so vitally concerned the prosperity and the morality of the nation. What other questions, among all those which have arisen in our politics, have so steadily grown in importance? What question to-day presents issues more difficult of solution, or which are the source of more anxiety to patriotic and thoughtful citizens, than this? How can we so administer the government that its daily operations shall not develop infidelity and corruption, fatal alike to all the virtues of official and private life? However the past may be excused, we can hardly find in the future a justification for a continued neglect of the science of administration which, as we have seen, the statesmen of every other enlightened nation have made one of the paramount studies of politics. For surely it is not the increase of wealth, the growth of great cities, or the advance of population that will purify the fountains of virtue or make the problems of government easier. When, perhaps in the lifetime of persons now living, the residents of Washington holding places in the public service shall exceed her present population; when the country shall contain three hundred millions of people, of which