THE CIVIL SERVICE. The chief criticisms of the Civil Service of the United States indulged in by the opponents of this Administration are based either upon a total misapprehension or a willful misstatement of the facts. The Civil Service law was enacted in 1883 for the purpose of stopping the flagrant abuses which had developed under the old patronage system of appointments. Under that system the government service, particularly in the Departments at Washington, had become inefficient and extravagant. Public office was considered a perquisite of the party in power, not a public trust. It was to remedy such evils that the Civil Service law was enacted; and during the twenty-one years of its enforcement, there has been developed a high order of industry, integrity, and efficiency in the public service. This development has, of course, not been free from difficulties; mistakes have been made, but year by year the merit system has been improved and extended, until now the competitive classified service covers about 117,000 Federal employees, and is recognized as necessary for good administration. The conclusive answers to the criticisms are the following plain statements of existing conditions and the acts of this Administration: First.-Entrance to the Federal classified service is not dependent upon personal or political influence; hence the service is now composed of self-respecting, independent men and women who appreciate that advancement will depend upon individual industry and ability. They do not constitute a body of permanent officeholders who are protected from removal even though inefficient and incapacitated, as is charged. The power of removal is absolute in the head of every Department, this rule having been clearly defined by President Roosevelt, and explained by the Commission in its last annual report, as follows: "The Commission desires to call particular attention to this provision, under which appointing officers are made the absolute judges of the sufficiency of reasons given for the removal of any person in the competitive classified service. No examination of witnesses is required, nor any trial or hearing, except in the discretion of the officer making the removal. The rule is intended to prevent removals upon secret charges and to stop political pressure for removals. * The civil service law and rules pro vide no tenure of office except that based upon efficiency and good behavior, and under the requirements of the law and rules it is as much the duty of an appointing officer to remove classified employees for inefficiency as it is not to discriminate against them in any way for political or religious reasons.' The merit system does not result in an undue permanency of tenure. Fifty-seven per cent of the persons in the entire executive civil service have served less than five years, and seventy-four per cent less than ten years. In the Departments at Washington naturally the service is more stable, but there forty-one per cent of the employees have served less than five years and sixty per cent less than ten years. The appointments made as a result of the examinations in the entire service are at the rate of about 2,100 per month. About twenty-two per cent of the entire service, and about ten per cent of the Departmental service in Washington, changes each year. The inefficient employee gives way to the efficient, or the efficient employee finds private work more profitable or more congenial. The charge that the service is filled with superannuated clerks is unfounded. Sixty per cent of the employees are less than forty years old, and ninety-one per cent less than sixty years; in Washington fifty per cent are less than forty and eighty-seven per cent less than sixty. Second. It is not claimed that a competitive examination is an absolutely correct means of determining the qualifications of applicants, but it is the best means yet devised. The Civil Service Commission is constantly changing the character of the examinations to meet the special requirements of particular places The experience of twenty years has shown definitely that t average examination can be passed by any intelligent person who has had a common school education, and does afford a remarkably accurate basis for the determination of the relative ability of applicants. As a result of the examination for the scientific and technical positions, there have been built up various corps of thoroughly trained men who have placed the scientific work of this Government in the forefront among the nations of the world. This has been particularly true, and the results have been of great practical value, in the Departments of Interior, Agriculture, and Commerce and Labor. Third. It is a mistake to suppose that the Civil Service Commission exists simply for the purpose of enforcing the law and rules. Its purpose is to provide the most efficient eligibles possible for every branch of the service. It looks to the good of the service, not to the mere enforcement of a rule. It is the barrier against the spoils system, but it does not protect the inefficient or dishonest employee. The ideal Civil Service law should close the door to entrance into the public service except through a method which can be followed by any qualified person without political influence or favor, but leaves to the executive authorities the power to remove for any cause, other than political or religious. It is toward this ideal that the present Administration is working. The business of the Government has grown in proportions not appreciated by the people at large. The executive Departments are made responsible for the expenditure of about $600,000,000 annually.. Such expenditures can be wisely and honestly made only by exercising the highest degree of business ability and selecting efficient, capable employees who will make good service to the government their ambition. President Roosevelt has proved that under his administration the business of government is so conducted. He has appointed men of recognized ability and judgment to carry on executive work. He has made no promises impossible of fulfillment. By precept and example he has inspired public officers to a higher sense of duty. He has shown that neither personal nor political influence can save the corrupt official from punishment. American citizens should remember and take to heart his words spoken at the unveiling of the Sherman statue: "The most successful governments are those in which the average public servant possesses that variant of loyalty which we call patriotism, together with common sense and honesty. We can as little afford to tolerate a dishonest man in the public service as a coward in the army. The murderer takes a single life; the corruptionist in public life, whether he be bribe giver or bribe taker, strikes at the heart of the commonwealth. In every public service, as in every army, there will be wrongdoers, there will occur misdeeds. This can not be avoided; but vigilant watch must be kept, and as soon as discovered the wrongdoing must be stopped and the wrongdoers punished." Protection steadily enlarges the home market for farm products. Hon. L. R. Casey. Well-paid wage-earners are generous Senator Casey, in the American Economist. consumers.-Former The theory of free trade between nations is as fallacious, impracticable, and utterly absurd as is that of free love between families.-Hon. B. F. Jones. We know our own minds and we have kept of the same mind for a sufficient length of time to give to our policy coherence and sanity.-President Roosevelt's speech accepting 1904 nomination. It is true, as Peter Cooper well said: "No goods purchased abroad are cheap that take the place of our own labor and our own raw material.”—H. K. Thurber, in the American Economist. The dollar paid to the farmer, the wage-earner, and the pensioner must continue forever equal in purchasing and debt-paying power to the dollar paid to any Government creditor.-Maj. MeKnley to Notification Committee, 1896. RAILWAY REGULATION. Work of the Interstate Commerce Commission. No more important or difficult task devolves upon the Government than the efficient regulation of our railway systems. The marvelous rapidity of their growth, their incomparable utility, the indispensable service they perform, the vast capital they represent, and the enormous amount of labor they employ all require their subjection to adequate public control. As the function of railway transportation becomes better understood and the dependence thereon of all other activities is more clearly perceived the greater will be the demand for securing to every citizen the right of fair and equal treatment in the use of these public facilities. In nearly every civilized country except the United States and Great Britain the railroads are owned and operated by the several governments, and public ownership here is not without its advocates. This proposition, however, has not made any considerable headway and is not likely for a long time to become a political issue. It is a project at variance with our inherited ideas and the traditional spirit of our institutions. The dominant sentiment of our people is strongly in favor of allowing this service to be performed by private enterprise, yet so controlled and regulated as to secure reasonable charges and prevent discriminating practices. It is of the utmost consequence, therefore, that laws enacted for this purpose shall be vigorously and thoroughly enforced. The first serious attempt at Federal railway control was the passage of the act to regulate commerce, commonly known as the interstate commerce law, in 1887. The adminstration of this law was committed to a commission of five members, of whom not more than three shall belong to the same political party; the commission was intended to be, and in fact has always been, strictly nonpartisan. Under this law and its various amendments the commission exercises such authority as has been conferred upon it by the Congress, and the results have been in the main highly satisfactory. It must be remembered, however, that the Commission is an administrative and not a judicial body. It has no power to enforce its own orders, much less can it punish criminal offenders. It is practically dependent for success upon the vigilant cooperation of the Department of Justice. The civil remedies which this law provides must be enforced against disobedient carriers by suits in the Federal courts, while the criminal remedies afforded are wholly in the hands of the various United States attorneys under the direction of the Attorney-General. The efficiency and usefulness of the Commission must in the nature of the case be determined largely by the attitude and efforts of the Department of Justice. Bearing these facts in mind, it is not easy to estimate the beneficial results which have been attained during the last few years. The Commission has been sustained and encouraged in its difficult work, and the law has been enforced with a degree of ability and success never before approached. Between the Department and the Commission the most cordial relations have constantly obtained, and they have acted together in harmonious effort and with a common purpose to promote the public welfare. The last report of the Commission, submitted to the Congress in December, 1903, closes with this significant statement: "In conclusion the Commission takes pleasure in saying that the Department of Justice has promptly and cheerfully complied with every request for the prosecution of civil and criminal proceedings, and has in various ways materially aided the efforts of the Commission to enforce the regulating statutes.". This tribute from an independent and nonpartisan board to a Republican Attorney-General carries its own comment. But this is by no means all that has been done during the present Administration. A Republican Congress has passed and a Republican President has approved amendments to the interstate commerce law which have greatly increased its efficacy and greatly aided the success of public regulation. As a means for the correction of transportation abuses these amendments have in fact re invigorated the law by removing defects and adding needful provisions. The regulating statute has been put upon a far more workable basis and the utility of this legislation has already been proven beyond doubt or question. This is particularly true of the Elkins law, so called, which was approved in February, 1903. Concerning this law the Commission in its last annual report makes the following statement: "It has proved a wise and salutary enactment. It has corrected serious defects in the original law and greatly aided the attainment of some of the purposes for which that law was enacted. No one familiar with railway conditions can expect that rate-cutting and other secret devices wll immediately and wholly disappear, but there is basis for a confident belief that such offenses are no longer characteristic of railway operations. That they have greatly diminished is beyond doubt, and their recurrence to the extent formerly known is altogether unlikely. Indeed, it is believed that never before in the railroad history of this country have tariff rates been so well or so generally observed as they are at the present time." Only those familiar with the history of railway operations can fully appreciate the significance of this official declaration. It means that the announced charges of railway carriers are now in fact actually applied to large and small shippers alike. This is cause for public rejoicing. As everyone knows, the secret advantages heretofore secured by rebates and other forms of favoritism were the dishonest means by which large concerns often crushed out their smaller rivals. Nothing has so powerfully aided the aggressions of industrial trusts, nothing connected with these combinations has been so offensive and destructive, as the private bargains of one sort and another by which they secured lower freight rates than independent dealers were compelled to pay. This was the characteristic and odious evil of railway methods up to a recent date. Within the last two years this evil has been thoroughly suppressed. To a very great extent, to an extent which justifies the most favorable comment, the whole rebate business has been broken up and is rapidly disappearing. This is perhaps the greatest benefit that could be conferred upon the general business interests of the country. It gives each man the same opportunity and puts the small dealer on a footing of equality with his largest rival so far as transportation charges are concerned. It is difficult to realize the advance that has been made in this regard within a comparatively short time. The salutary provisions of the Elkins law, and the resolute and persistent efforts of the Attorney-General during the present administration, have practically removed the greatest and gravest of railroad abuses. The important and most useful changes effected by the Elkins law are described by the Commission as follows: In the first place, the recent amendment makes the railway corporation itself liable to prosecution in all cases where its officers and agents are liable under the former law. Such officers and agents continue to be liable as heretofore, but this liability is now extended to the corporation which they represent. This change in the law corrects a defect which has always been a source of embarrassment to the Commission, as has been explained in previous reports, because it gave immunity to the principal and beneficiary of a guilty transaction. As a practical matter, it is believed that much benefit will result from the fact that proceedings can now be taken against the corporation. The amended law has abolished the penalty of imprisonment, and the only punishment now provided is the imposition of fines. As the corporation can not be imprisoned or otherwise punished for misdemeanors than by money penalties, it was deemed expedient that no greater punishment be visited upon the offending officer or agent. The various arguments in favor of this change have been stated in former reports and need not here be repeated. Whether the good results claimed by its advocates will be realized is by no means certain, but the present plan should doubtless be continued until its utility is further tested. A further change has been effected by the act of 1903 which is of much importance. As the former law was construed by the courts, it was not sufficient to show that a secret and preferential rate had been allowed in a particular case; there had to be further proof of the payment of schedule charges, or at least higher charges than those in question, by some other person on like and contemporaneous shipments. That is, it was necessary to prove discrimination in fact as between shippers entitled to the same rates by reason of receiving the same service. The practical result of this construction was to render successful prosecutions extremely difficult, if not impossible, because the required evidence could rarely be secured, and this was particularly the case when there was an extensive demoralization of rates and consequently the most urgent occasion for the use of criminal remedies, Under such circumstances it frequently happened that all shippers received substantially the same rates, much less, however, than the published tariff, and thus there was no actual discrimination. This aggravating defect appears to have been wholly cured, as the new law in most explicit terms makes the published tariff the standard of lawfulness, as respects criminal misconduct, and any departure therefrom is declared to be a misdemeanor. It is sufficient now, in order to make out a case of criminal wrongdoing, to show that a lower or different rate from that named in the tariff has been accorded. The effect of this amendment is to make the shipper liable whenever the carrier is liable, while either or both of them may be convicted by simply proving that the rate charged is not covered by the tariff applicable to the transaction. The foregoing are the principal changes made by the Elkins law as respects the criminal remedies for prohibited practices. They relate solely to acts which are made misdemeanors and have no other application. The further provisions of this law, affecting what may be called civil remedies, are likewse important and may be briefly mentioned. One of these makes it lawful to include as parties, in addition to the carrier complained of, all persons interested in or affected by the matters involved in the proceedings; and this may be done both before the Commission and when sult is begun originally in the circuit court. Under the former law carriers only could be made parties defendant; under the amended law shippers also may be included. To what extent this change will prove advantageous the Commission does not undertake at this time to express an opinion. The other and more essential provision of the character now referred to is the one which confers jurisdiction upon the circuit courts of the United States to restrain departure from published rates, or "any discriminations forbidden by law," by writ of injunction or other appropriate process. The writ or process thus authorized is enforcible as well against parties interested in the traffic as against the carrier. This provsion disposes of a question which has been the subject of much controversy, and furnishes a comprehensive remedy which is believed to be of the greatest value. During the last two years, also, the safety appliance laws have been improved by important amendments and by an act requiring reports of railway accidents. This humane legislation has proved of incalculable benefit to railroad employees. It safeguards their dangerous and responsible work, and at the same time gives added security to the millions of travelers. These are immense benefits to the public and to hundreds of thousands of the most intelligent deserving working men in the country. and Money in circulation in the United States July 1, 1904. [Official statement of the Treasury Department.] Population of the United States July 1, 1904, estimated at 81,867,000; circulation *For redemption of outstanding certificates an exact equivalent in amount of the †This statement of money held in the Treasury as assets of the Government does For a full statement of assets see Public Debt Statement. |