CIVIL SERVICE
The sole purpose of discussing the Civil Service System in this
connection is to show what must ensue if the government
continues its trend and enlarges its business operations.
Partisan politics cannot be eliminated, neither does the Civil
Service secure the most efficient. Concrete and actual
instances are given as illustrations.
So much has been said in favor of Civil Service by its friends, and so
much criticism offered by those who know little about it, that I am
impelled to submit a few observations drawn from five years’ experience
at the head of a department having, a portion of the time, as high as
twenty thousand people on its payroll, over ninety percent of whom were
in the classified service.
It is not my purpose to criticise or commend. I do intend, however, to
make reasonably clear some of the inevitable conditions that would
ensue if the government should remain operator or should become owner
and operator of railroads, merchant ships, express, cable, telegraph
and telephone companies, and other public utilities, constructor of
airplanes, merchant ships, and logically producers of all materials and
supplies therefor.
Everyone concedes that to avoid complete partisan prostitution of these
widely-extended and diversified interests, every agent, servant and
employee, with the possible exception of unskilled laborers, would have
to be covered under Civil Service. This would palliate the evil but, as
we shall presently see, would not prevent political manipulation and
influence, and would render efficient service absolutely impossible.
It will be idle to approach this subject without recognizing a very
marked distinction between business operations and government service.
Business is conducted primarily for the profit that legitimately
results. The wise man knows, however, that the better the service, the
more certain his rewards. The merchant who best serves his customers
will have the most customers to serve, and the lawyer who best protects
his clients will have the largest and the most lucrative practice.
Service and profit are seldom divorced. If it be true, as has been
said, that a grateful people will make a beaten path to the door of him
who improves a mousetrap, it is also equally true that the world’s
financial rewards are liberal beyond calculation to him who renders any
substantial service.
This principle does not apply to government matters. Here the ultimate
end is not profit, but power. While a political party may hope to be
continued if its service is acceptable, it has no right to expect its
administration will be acceptable if it neglects the ordinary methods
by which approval is secured—which is politics. In politics,
everything reasonable and honest is made to serve the ends of politics,
exactly as in business everything reasonable and honest is made to
contribute to profit.
A most natural result of public service is loyalty to superiors. This
is true in a very marked degree in all government departments. If
government clerks were to vote, I suppose three-fourths of them would
support the party in power, without regard to which party it happened
to be. One-half of the balance would fear even to vote lest they might
cause offense and prejudice their promotion—the sole consideration
with many department clerks—while only a comparative few would openly
support the opposite party and some of these would subsequently regret
it.
A case is current where an official who is supposed not to be devoid of
future political ambition, said to a friend who had witnessed the
obsequious servility of subordinates: “There are two million of these
and every one is a voter.”
You will recognize that no promotion, demotion or dismissal within a
business organization invites newspaper comment or criticism from
friend or foe. In government service the exact opposite is the rule.
When constituents inform a congressman that someone from his district
has had his salary reduced, the whole delegation from that state get
busy. Let it be known that some clerk has been longer in a department
than another who has received more promotion, and an explanation is
certain to be demanded, and it is relatively useless to urge
inefficiency as the cause. In such cases the public ascribes but two
causes, politics and favoritism.
While “offensive partisanship” is publicly forbidden, it is generally
recognized on the inside that no activity of a partisan character is
“offensive” so long as it is quiet, and is exercised in favor of the
party in power. Public officials, of the rank of postmasters, customs
and internal revenue collectors, and district attorneys are not
expected to be delegates to political conventions, but I have never
known their superiors, when of the same political faith, to object to
their being in the town while the convention is in session, maintaining
suitable headquarters at the hotel, and even volunteering valuable
advice to those who happen to call, as well as to those who are sent
for.
But politics is not the only weakness of the system. The public has
been taught to believe that Civil Service examinations result in
securing the most efficient. This is a serious delusion.
Those who take civil service examinations usually find their names
rejected or upon the eligible list within six months. It takes about
that long to classify. Any time within two years thereafter the
applicant is liable to be certified and called.
When a requisition is made the Commission certifies three names. It is
not at all likely that they are the three whose examinations show them
the best qualified. That question is not considered—applicants either
pass or fail. They are simply the three names at the head of the list
from the state whose quota is not exhausted. The officer calling for
the clerk examines the records of the certified names and makes a
selection. Thereupon the applicant is notified to present himself at a
given place where the minimum salary—in normal times seven hundred
dollars per annum—awaits him. Even though he took his examination only
twelve months before, the chances are he declines, giving as his reason
that he is now getting a thousand dollars with good prospects of
promotion.
It is only a question of time, however, when some applicant will be
found who, during the period between examination and certification,
varying from six months to two years and six months, has been unable to
get a job at seven hundred dollars and he jumps at the chance to “serve
his country.”
You knew this must be the way but probably you had not stopped to
analyze it. The Civil Service screen is so constructed as to catch the
small fish and allow the large ones to escape. And there is no way
known to man to change it without opening wide the door for favoritism,
which the Civil Service system is supposed to close and effectively bar.
Nevertheless some of the clerks and employees selected in this way
develop a good degree of efficiency and prove far better than anyone
would expect from an inspection of the machinery by which they are
secured. With scarcely an exception they are honest and conscientious
toilers, with very little ambition. A few have ambition but these
should, and usually do, soon resign.
I have in mind a business organization with several thousand on
its payroll. Its operations extend from ocean to ocean and its
employees include geologists, chemists, engineers of every kind,
purchasing agents, salesmen, superintendents of both construction and
transportation, clerks, clear down to unskilled laborers. Everyone
connected with the organization is made to understand that any
position is open to him provided he can show greater efficiency than
the incumbent. While most of the force have grown up within the
organization, not all have been started at the minimum salary nor
promoted because of length of service. The former is insisted upon, and
the latter urged, by all friends of Civil Service.
Imagine such a concern as I have described, depending upon an outside
commission to examine and certify the people whom it might employ in
its clerical and technical force, and being bound by its own by-laws
not to employ anyone selected in any other way. No business concern
could face competition and survive under such a system. Yet everyone
recognizes that when applied to government affairs, Civil Service is
not only the best but the only way. I am not criticising it. I am only
showing the inevitable result if we change the purpose of government
from the greatest liberty institution in the world to a corporation for
the transaction of business.
During five years that I recruited the force of the Treasury Department
from names certified by the Civil Service Commission, nothing occurred
to engender ill feeling. The members of the Commission and the officers
of the Treasury Department understood each other perfectly and
sympathized. Every member of the Commission sought as best he
could—subject, of course, to the restrictions and limitations of his
office—to serve the Treasury Department, and the Secretary of the
Treasury, believing in Civil Service, reciprocated. There were,
however, some rather plain and expressive letters exchanged. Believing
that letters that actually passed between departments are the best
proof of conditions as they exist, I have inserted in the Appendix the
material correspondence covering four distinct cases.
Some of the letters were answered by personal interviews but enough
remains to show the cordial feeling that existed, as well as the nature
of the contentions. It also reveals the earnestness with which the
Secretary of the Treasury sought some relaxation in the rules which
friends of the system, as well as the members of the Commission, insist
must be rigidly enforced, and which were rigidly enforced.
The last case cited relates to a request for experienced lawyers for
special agents of the Treasury Department. The necessity for these will
be apparent to every experienced business man.
Many of the tariff rates are _ad valorem_, the duty being levied upon
the foreign market value of the imported merchandise. Importers are
required to enter their goods at the price at which such articles are
usually bought and sold in the country of their origin. Undervaluation
by unscrupulous importers is the most common way of defrauding the
government. Cases of alleged undervaluation are tried by the Board of
General Appraisers, at which the importers are represented by lawyers
who make a specialty of this class of cases. They are not only men of
experience but many of them possess great natural aptitude. Some, I
suppose, make as high as fifty thousand dollars per annum. The
government is represented by attorneys who receive, if I remember
correctly, three thousand dollars per annum, and the cases are usually
prepared by special agents, or special employees, who receive from
fifteen hundred to two thousand dollars per annum. The government is at
a tremendous disadvantage. I have heard it estimated that the Treasury
loses two hundred million dollars per annum through undervaluations. I
think this is excessive but unquestionably it runs into tens of
millions.
I desired several country lawyers who had had actual experience in
trying cases, and asked the Civil Service Commission to provide an
eligible list. The need of capable men in this particular branch of the
service is well illustrated by the following incidents.
Certain importers were entering their merchandise, which had been paid
for in Indian rupees, as costing the bullion value of rupees, about
twenty cents. England was maintaining the parity of the rupee at about
fifty cents in our money. The Secretary of the Treasury certified that
the rupee was worth fifty cents and directed that duties be collected
accordingly. As was anticipated, the importers all paid under protest
and one of them prosecuted an appeal. A decision against the government
was rendered by the Board of General Appraisers and by all the courts
including the Supreme Court of the United States. I ordered that
another case be made and gave instructions how it should be prepared.
Again, much to my surprise, the government was defeated. Investigation
showed that the second case had been prepared exactly like the first.
More detailed instructions were given and the government was
successful, and more than one million dollars that had been paid by
importers under protest, was saved to the government and at least two
hundred thousand dollars per annum from then until now. Any country
lawyer with a general practice would have known how to prepare and
present the case in the first instance.
The Treasury Department has several special agents in Europe whose
business it is to look after and discover evidence of undervaluation,
as well as other frauds upon the revenues of the country. The
Department knew that certain merchandise was viciously undervalued, but
the special agents all failed to get material evidence. Special
employees were not then under Civil Service and I got an up-state
lawyer from New York to accept a position as special employee, sent him
to Europe and he came back with evidence that secured advances in
valuations which saved the government perhaps fifty thousand dollars a
year from one importer alone.
Appendix “D” will show the material correspondence concerning this
particular request for experienced trial lawyers. My first request is
dated September 20, 1905; my second, October 14th of the same year.
Finally the Commission replied and its first letter bears date of
December 2, 1905. It mentions oral requests also having been made.
Several examinations were held but up to the time I left the Treasury
Department, March 4, 1907, no eligible list had been provided
containing a single lawyer who had ever prepared or tried a case in any
court. The department needed at least six, could have profitably used
twelve, but could not and did not get one. If interested read Appendix
“D.” You will detect enough spice to give it a flavor not its own.
The correspondence set out in Appendix “C” has reference to a tobacco
examiner. Tobacco intended for Florida was being imported from Cuba at
a certain inland city and then shipped back to Tampa and Key West. The
duty on unstemmed wrapper tobacco was at that time $1.85 per pound and
only 35 cents per pound on unstemmed filler tobacco. When any bale of
tobacco contained more than fifteen per cent wrapper, the entire bale
was dutiable as wrapper. There was a further provision that tobacco
from two or more provinces or dependencies, if mixed, should be
dutiable at $1.85 per pound, regardless of its character. Naturally, a
tobacco examiner should know something about tobacco. In fact, that is
the only subject that a tobacco examiner need know anything about. The
correspondence will show the efforts made to secure one and the desire
of the Civil Service Commission to aid, as well as the disaster which
it believed would follow if the Treasury Department was allowed any
voice in the manner of the examination or in classification of those
who took the same.
Appendix “B” has reference to a tea examiner, another position that, in
the opinion of the Secretary of the Treasury, should be filled by an
expert.
The correspondence with reference to a tobacco examiner began some time
in 1904. My first rejection of each of the three names certified as
being eligible is dated December 15, 1904. The request for a tea
examiner was made somewhat later. I quote a paragraph from the Civil
Service Commission’s letter of December 9, 1905, which, though written
with special reference to the request for eligible trial lawyers,
mentions both tobacco and tea examiners:
“Your attention is also invited to the recent examination for tea
examiner and tobacco examiner at the Port of ——. Owing to objections
by your Department to eligibles certified, it became necessary to hold
three examinations before a selection was made for tobacco examiner and
two examinations before a selection was made for tea examiner. The
examinations finally resulted in the selection of the temporary
employees, who, in the judgment of the Commission, after careful
investigation, have no unusual qualifications for the duties to be
performed and came in at the advanced age of sixty-three years. It
seemed to the Commission so apparent that the examinations in question
had not resulted in securing to the government the services of the most
suitable competitors, that it became necessary for it to recommend to
the President that it be relieved of all responsibility for these
examinations and on November 18th, the President placed in the excepted
class, one examiner of tea and one examiner of tobacco at the Port of
——, which employees do not now have the status of competitive
employees.”
It will be noted that the Civil Service Commission itself finally
recognized such a weakness in the system that it consented and even
recommended that Treasury officials be permitted to select _one_
examiner of tea and _one_ examiner of tobacco at _one_ port, though the
last phrase quoted seems to betray a slight apprehension of disaster
resulting from there being in the United States two examiners, each
requiring very accurate and technical qualifications, “who do not now
have the status of competitive employees.”
Appendix “A” is limited to two letters written by the Secretary of the
Treasury to the Civil Service Commission refusing to approve rules and
regulations which it proposed to promulgate, unless the President so
directed. I will add that the President did not so direct. In this
instance, as in the last two, the Secretary of the Treasury had his way.
DIPLOMATIC SERVICE.
While on this subject, I cannot refrain from discussing Civil Service
as applied to our diplomatic and consular service.
There is quite a widespread demand that everything shall be taken out
of politics, and a presumption is indulged, that, if this were done,
all of the evils which now inhere in representative government would be
cured. Undoubtedly men have been rewarded for political service with
appointments to foreign fields, and some of these appointees have been
wanting both in business experience and education as well as in
aptitude. On the other hand, it is most unfortunate if only those who
are disqualified for positions of responsibility are interested in
politics. If every public position at home and abroad were to be filled
with those who either take no interest in public affairs, or by those
who are incapable of exerting any political influence, do you think the
service would be materially improved?
The further criticism is indulged that administrations make foreign
appointments from among their party friends, and utterly ignore
adherents of the opposite political faith. Has it ever occurred to you
that when a man is unable to find as good and able men among those who
believe in political doctrines which he advocates as are available
among his opponents, he ought in justice to himself to renounce
allegiance to the party he believes in, and join the ranks of those
with whom he disagrees?
Undoubtedly, the United States has sent some chumps abroad, but anyone
who has lived long in Washington must have recognized that other
countries also occasionally have chumps in their diplomatic service.
After some years’ observation, I asked John Hay, then Secretary of
State, whose experience at home and observation abroad better qualified
him to speak than any other man in America, how our diplomatic and
consular service compared with that of other countries. Promptly and
without hesitation, he said: “It is universally recognized everywhere
that American foreign service is the best in the world.”
One might as well expect to develop a successful trial lawyer by
confining him to a law school all his life, or a successful business
man by keeping him indefinitely in a business college, as to expect to
produce an efficient representative of American interests abroad by
requiring him to spend the most virile period of his life in studying
how to represent these interests and all the while keeping him out of
touch with the interests which he is to represent. A lawyer should
understand his client’s business, if possible, better than his client.
If he is to represent mining interests, he should know metallurgy, all
processes of mining, reduction of ores and mining practices, as well as
mining laws. Before a man can successfully, advantageously and wisely
represent American interests abroad, he must understand American
interests at home. He must have a practical knowledge of what Americans
require in foreign countries, and the natural effect at home of the
things he is trying to do abroad.
When confined to clerical positions, Civil Service is a lesser evil
than anything else that has been tried, but it falls far short of
being a panacea. When applied to positions requiring scientific,
professional, technical or expert knowledge, it is an utter failure. If
the government extends beyond its appropriate functions, and enters the
business arena, Civil Service will result, first, in the greatest
possible inefficiency; second, in political manipulation and control of
everything, and, third, in transforming a hitherto virile and
self-reliant people into a race of pap seekers. If the government
pursues its present trend and enters one field of business activity
after another it will logically end with everyone on the government
payroll and all of us working for the rest of us and taxing ourselves
to pay pensions to ourselves. When a government once enters the field
of paternalism there is no place where it can logically stop.