New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1903-12-11
4 CIVIL SERVICE LESSON.

Mr.. Schurz. in his address before the Ma
tional Civifs Service Reform League at Balti-
more Yesterday turned the POstOfice Depart
ment scandals TO effective use in answer TO
the officeholders who are always pleading for
exempt positions under them on the ground
that as they are responsible for the work
done they should be allowed 10 select THE
kind Of subordinates they, want" Ihat is
hoary old objection to the merit system, which
still is trotted out from time to time, and per
haps fools some people The Postmaster OF
Brooklyn the other day appealed TO Washing
ton TO exempt from competition the superin-
tendency Of branch postofice because it was
a place of fiduciary trust for which the post
master was responsible. The same plea is IRE
quently made with reference TO clerks In the
finance department Of this and other cities,
and though the federal Civil Service laws, and
in a less degree those of New-YOrk State, hold
such places properly open to competition, yet
spoilsmen find these "conidentaI' positions a
convenient refuge.
1t must be confessed that there Is some plau-
sibiIity in their argument An officer is bonded
for the faithful discharge of duties which he
must intrust to others. Those others. it is
said. should be men personally selected, in
whom he has confidence. That argument would
have more weight if those confidential seiec
4ions did not more than half the time show
that il was a mere pretence to cover spoils
Men are frequently appointed for political
reasons who would never be selected by the
same appointing power for a place of trust
in Drivate business, and with whom the SUI
nerfor's reputation and bonded obligations are
less safe than they would be in the hands OF
the average product of the competitive sys-
tenn When James A. Roberts was Controller
Of New-York he once made the remark, just
after defalcaton in his department that the
subordinates who had betrayed their trust had
been those selected on personal recommenda-
lions, and not those who won their places by
competitive examination. Mr.. Schurz draws
similar conclusion from Assistant Postmaster
General Bristow's report. He says:
You viii be struck with the fact that OF all
the public servants who were III consequence
of that investigation indicted for fraud or NAL
feasance, not one had come lnto the service by
regular competitive examination. only one had
gone through competition. not for entrance
but for promotion. All Of them had originally
obtained their aDDointments bv politfcal ipflu-
ence or personal fGAor; and Il is 10 be noted as
peculiarly significant that in several cases the
positions TO which they have been appointed
" ere excepted from the competitive rule, on the
ground so soiemnly insisted upon by the patron
age nonger. that they were places of a confden-
tial or fiducary character requiring a peculiar
degree OF integrity and truStworthiness, OF
which no competitive examination could furnish
adequate proof, and the aseertainment Of which
n,net therefore be left 20 the enlightened dis
cration OF the appointing ofIicer-that is to the
recommendation of some influential politician
And az the persons who had to leave the service
either. nv resignation or removal. for some minor
delinquency. only three had entered it through
the portal Of competition.
That Is a pretty good showing for the com
petitive system. Apparently the men who OBJ
tained Office by proving fitness for it went on