The Farmington times., 1917-03-23
DIvoRCING POLITICS


his efforts to introduce new method:
| in the Post office Department, and t
run it as if the people, who are popu
larly supposed to govern in this coun.
try, had nothing to say as to how the
public business shall be conducted
Last week he made another of his or.
ders providing a modified civil ser.
vice for first, second and third class
postmasters after April 1st, in pur.
suance of his desire "to divorce com.
pletely the postal service from poll.
tics" Speaker Clark, commenting OF
,one of Mr.. Burleson's former orders
| placing fourth class postmasters in
the civil service list, said: "To my
mind that raised more cain in poll
tics than anything else, and it is one
of the main reasons the next House
is so close. People in a Democratic
district want Democrat in Office as
Postmaster"
Mr.. Clark is right. Why divorce
'the postal service from politics more
than any other public service? Poll
tics is the life and foundation of our
republican institutions, and every
good citizen who loves these institu-
tions and wishes to maintain them is
in politics and keeps himself as
thoroughly informed on the political
trend as possible. To divorce any
department of government from pol
itics is to divorce it from the people
and to build up select class from
whom alone selections may be made to
fill its positions. 1t is contrary to the
spirit of our democratic form of
government. Civil service rules and
regulation to a limited extent may be
well enough in certain lines of pub
lie employment where deftness and
expertness are particularly necessary,
but carried to extremes they are per-
hicious and demoralizing to repub-
pican institutions. Eliminate politics
and you destroy the interest and con-
eern of the people in all public af-
fairs and in the election of their
chief officers, for the hope of recog-
milton and reward is the handspring
of human action in public as well as
private undertakings.
In republic such as ours, where
government is based on the consent
of the governed, there are of neces-
sity differences of opinion or policies,
and these differences naturally ex-
press themselves in and through pol |
itical parties. To carry out the pol
icies and strengthen its position, the |
party in power appoints agents of it's
own party to the positions within its
appointive authority, and the party |
that tries to hold its place by main
select class of no known OF.
definite political convictions from
which to make its appointments, the
duties of which may be mastered in
a short time by any one sufficiently
intelligent to hold a public office,
makes a sure way for it's defeat.
If this alleged civil service innova-
ion is such wonderfully good thing
% promote public efficiency, why not
'un the whole gamut, institute a
'ollege of high-brow experts and re-
Iuire every citizen who wants to run
or office pass an examination as to
lis qualifications before he can be-
ome candidate? Absurd? To be
ure it is, but neither is it in Ihar-
nony with our institutions to foster
select and favored class for official
,referment.
Perhaps one of the most reasonable
from a Democratic view
,oint, that might be made of Pres
dent Wilson is, that he has surround
d himself in his Cabinet and heads of
departments with several men who
re not as soundly imbued with the
pirit and policies of the party that
lected him as they might be. They
want to run things along their own
elf-approved theoretical lines with
ut regard to the sentiment and feel
ng of the rank and file of the party.
t is calculated to demoralize and dis
ntegrate any party. Former Pres
dent Taft recognized the advantage
f keeping his own political partisans
n government positions, and so, just
,efore retiring, he placed whole
rmy of his appointees on the civil
ervice list, that they might be re-
aimed and to embarrass his Demo-
ratio successor. President Wilson
,ould have done well to have prompt
y rescended Mr.. Taft's order, bat
instead we have his Postmaster Gen
raj extending the overworked civil
ervice theorem.