Evening star., 1922-06-10
Apportionment and Merit.

IN the report OF Iile bureau OI e1-
ficiency recently submitted recon-
mendation was made that the appor-
tionment Of offices law of 1888. form
ing the basic feature of the civil serv-
ice system, should be repealed. This
recommendation is in line with the
best thought and the interest of the
public service. 1t conforms to the es-
Sential principle of the merit system.
Apportionment Of offices has often
been characterized as relic of the old
spoils system. Though never capable
of strict enforcement, this rule for the
division of appointments in the civil
service in proportion to the state
populations has hampered the govern
ment in equipping itself for its admin
istrative work. Immediately after its
adoption in the first days of merit ap-
rointments it was found impossible to
carry it into effect faithfully and fully.
From time to time various rules We're
adopted by the Civil Service Commits
sion to approximate proportionate dis
tribution of the offices. none Of them
working satisfactorily or with actu-
arial exactness. Exemptions We're of
necessity made from this law. A large
percentage of the government force
had to be appointed at large. as it
We're, without regard to states. The
commission found shortage Of eligi-
bles from states in arrears of appoint
ments, and not even extraordinary eff
forts to interest the people Of those
states in the matter of public service
appointments availed to bring up the
quotas.
Speaking unoffiCially and in their
private capacities. civil service COM
missioners have from time to time de-
clared the apportionment law to be a
handicap on administrative efficiency
Yet officially the commission has ad-
hered to it as faithfully as conditions
permitted, it's annual reports bearing
testimony to the strain of reconciling
an unworkable law to the proper sup
ply of government employees Of vari-
Gus grades.
The injustice Of the apportionment
law has been most severely felt by the
people of the District Of Columbia to
been the chief opportunity. Though
always in excess of its quota. the Dis
trict has nevertheless felt tre i'll eff
fects Of the ban raised against it on
the score Of its relatively small popu-
lation. Its youth, denied suitable op-
portunity for employment in indus
trial lines through the restriction of
the commercial life Of the capital on
the score of it being the seat of gov
ernment, and finding the doors to gov
ernment employment virtually closed,
have been forced to seek elsewhere
the means of earning a livelihood.
The apportionment of Offices law has
driven them from home, some Of them
to acquire residences in the states and
to return as appointees.
A true merit system takes no ac-
count Of state boundaries or geo.
graphic limitations. 1t requires mere
, ~ +tlliei IIdil tIlILtIiSilp oit lilS pdl VI
the appointee. Abundant opportunity
has been offered in recent years to the
people in all parts of the country to
join the government forces by the
holding of examinations at judiciously
chosen centers, and thus the competi-
ton has been countrywide. Yet the
apportionment law has limited the Civil
Service Commission in its certification
of eligibles with the result that, save
in respect to the necessarily exempted
positions of a technical and special
character, it has never been assured
of presenting for appointment those
best qualified to do the governments
work.
In short, where the apportionment
law has been workable it has opera ted
to the governments disadvantage. 1t
should long ago have been repealed.
It's repeal should now follow the
recommendation of the efficiency bu-
reau based upon a careful survey Of
departmental conditions.