The Washington critic., 1888-01-18
wAsnINGroN. JAN. Is, 1885.
Mr.. CLEMuSTs AND THE CIVIL
SERVICE LAW.

NhiNN I'VE LAW.
II ;, a popularity of the votaries of
Uivil-Servicc reform that they cannot
tolerate criticism even when friendly
and well meant. Anything in the
nature of an amendatory suggestion is
pounced upon at once as an attack on
the law; and we are not ut all sur
prised, therefore, to find Mr.. Glenn
ents of Georgia assailed as an enemy
to the good cause and the Speaker of
the House ccnsured for appointing
him to the chairmanship of the Civil
Service Reform Committee.
Mr.. Clements has had the hardi-
hood to say that in his judgment the
law Is not in all respects what it
should be- He is at once set down as
IN adhercnt of the spoils system, and
il is of no use for him to insist that he
is not.
Vet we doubt if there is better
friend of Civil Service Reform on the
floor of the House than this same gen
tleman from Georgia. lie only differs
from the self-constituted guardians of
the sacred statute in desiring to re-
lievc it of some of its incongruities, to
simplify its operations and give it a
more practical and less theoretical
character.
lie believes that there is too much
machinery--too much red tape--in
the manner of its enforcement, but
he would relax none of the require
ments for eligibility to appointment,
so far as they are needful to establish
the competency of an applicant for
clerical service. The tests made
should be direct and business-like, not
circuitous and ambiguous. Especial
attention should be given to moral
character, as well as mental aptitude.
The whole list of eligibles should be
open to selections, having due regard
to an equitable superintendent of the
offices TO be distributed, and by all
means should the forty-ive-year limit
be done away with,
Such, we are informed, are Mr..
Clements ideas on the subject very
briefly stated. Whether he was an
original advocate of the law, or
whether he is now Il thoroughly con-
WINGED believer in its necessity, is
wholly immaterial. 1t is enough to
know that he takes the law as he finds
it, and instead of demanding its re-
peal merely asks that its efficiency be
increased and its workings facilitated.
Why a man who seeks to promote
the efficacy of n grea9 measure of re-
form should be-classed with those
4 who wQlldbfing it into contempt and
disrcpute, it is difficult to understand.
lie takes the broad view that law
which Is designed to elevate and im-
prove the civil service will prove
successful in its operations only in the
proportion that il is best adapted to
accomplish this purpose. lie would
make it plain and practical, follow ing
the obvious rules that govern in the
selection of men for miscellaneous
business trusts. He would remove
the age Limitation because many men
over forty-hve years old, though re-
duced by the vicissitudes of life to
ask for Government employment,
possess superior qualifications for the
duties required-possibly for the
further reason that the young men OF
the country ought not to be en-,
couraged by the Government to enter
the civil service as place of refuge
for their exclusive enjoyment.
So that all things considered it will
doubtless le found that if Mr..
Clements, as chairman of the Civil
Service Reform Committee, proposes
any amcndatory legislation, it will
not be to embarrass and hinder the
execution of the law, but to give its
merits the most satisfactory and
fairest possible test.