CIVIL SERVICE REFORM, the im provement of the civil service in methods of appointment, rules of conduct, etc.; in the United States, the movement for the appoint ment of public servants according to their fit ness for their work, rather than their services to the party in power.
In the year 1835 a debate took place in the Senate of the United States on the condition of the civil service, and especially on the abuse of the power of appointment and removal to serve party ends instead of public ends. Among the senators who took part in the debate were the three whom history has judged the strongest in that famous body, Daniel Webster of Massa chusetts, Henry Clay of Kentucicy and John C. Calhoun of South Carolina. Differing wide ly in their views of party policy and rivals in ambition, they were of one mind as to the true nature of the public service and .as to the er rors and evils that had crept into it. Mr. Web ster, then in the prime of his young manhood, had already won the title of the "Great Ex pounder of the Constitution.° He thus stated the idea in which the others heartily joined: 'The theory of our institutions is plain; it is that government is an agency created for the good of the people, and that every person in office is the agent and servant of the people. Offices are created, not for the benefit of those who are to fill them, but for the public con venience.° There is no doubt that this is indeed the true theory of our institutions. It is to be found in all the early writings of the men who formed the goveriunent. It is the basis of the Declaration of Independence, that "governments are instituted among men° to secure the rights of °the governed° from whose consent °they derive their just powers.° When our national government was founded it was the only one in which offices were not a privilege, but a trust, imposed.by the choice of the people and for their sole interest. Neither birth nor rank nor wealth gave any title to them. Each of the men who held them was intended to be, in the words of Webster, "the agent and the servant of the people." This theory had grown out of the needs of the American people, and fitted them closely. As colonists they had had to work and fight hard for the nght to live and the means to live as free men in a wild land, far from the homes of their fathers, arnid many perils and hardships. There was no ruling class. among them. To attend to the common business of each little settlement, they were led to choose among their own uumber the agents best fitted for the task. These in the early days were, as in the towns of New England they still ar aselect-men," "trustees.° The name shows what was expected of them, and what was their title to employment. As the towns were grouped in counties and the counties in States, the public business grew, became more com plex and required a larger number of agents with different duties and powers, but the idea held. They were still agents, selected men,
trustees. From the most modest unpaid village or town officer to the President of the United States, the commander-in-chief of the army and navy of the nation and its representative in the eyes of the world, no man in the public service in this country is anything but the agent, the trustee of the people.
One result of the growth of the public busi ness has been that only a small part of the agents for doing this business are chosen di rectly by the people. Those thus chosen are entrusted with the employment or appointment of a very large number of others. The chief difference between the two classes is that those elected are expected to carry on the public business in a way that the majority of the vot ers .are in general agreed upon. They are the choice of the majority party and, so far as the nghts of all permit, they are the agents of that party. When the views and wishes of the ma jority change, these agents are usually changed also. But the far greater number of agents for doing the public business are appointed or employed. The duties of nearly all these are the same no matter what may be the policy of the majority party. In the national govern ment, for instance, the main work for those in office, except the highest, is the collection and expenditure of the taxes. The taxes are col lected on goods brought into this country for sale or on goods made here for sale; in other words, customs, duties, and internal revenue taxes. Parties differ widely as to which class of taxes should be the higher, and as to bovii high the custom duties should be. But all par ties agree that the taxes of ail sorts should be collected according to law honestly and fair ly, that the money should be carefully account ed for and none of it stolen or wasted. Agents for this purpose need to be good business men of character and ability; they do not need to be of one party or another. Again, the Post Office Department does a great part of the busi ness of the government. It collects mail mat ter of all kinds, transports it, delivers it at home or abroad, makes large payments on money or ders and sells the stamps by which the cost of its work is paid. As to tins work, there is no difference at all between parties and there has never been. The agents engaged in it need only to be honest and efficient. They do not need to be of one party or another. In all offices where the duties are of this sort, it is plain that those engaged in them should be selected for merit only, promoted as the service requires and re moved only for failure or incapacity to do their work in the best manner.