either from his home town or from his college. Few of the eighty per cent are experts. It was not necessary in these cases to offer uniforms in exchange for indispensable services but it is safe to say that if there had been no uniform connected with the job, these people would not have been offered the places and in most cases would not have accepted them anyhow. Thus the country would have been saved the spectacle of a dozen or more fellow-townsmen forming a non-combatant officers' club in a Washington office.

No, it is not the experts who need the inducement of the uniform-it is rather those who seek the distinction of the uniform in the absence of any other claim to distinction.

Many young men who have gone to Washington to accept desk jobs were lured there under false pretences. They were told that there was a job to do, requiring their special talents, and that they would be permitted to do it. They have found out that there is indeed plenty to do, but that it is next to impossible for a man in uniform to accomplish it. There they sit, day after day, following orders, following the narrow path of routine that has been mapped out for them, unable to protest because to do so would mean court-martial, unable to resign. They ask in vain to be assigned to foreign service.

In sum, then, the trouble is this: 1. Incompetent draft - evaders. (Really very few.)

2. Useless popinjays, mostly assigned to clerical work which could be performed better by skilled officeboys. (A good many of these.)

3. Men who could be of real service to the nation if relieved of the rites and observances that go with

the uniform. (The most numerous class.)

If General March really intends to rid Washington of this evil, he will not only merit the thanks of the country at large, but he will earn the undying gratitude of those truly capable men who are now bound hand and foot by military red tape and gagged by military etiquette.

H

A Pleasant Duty

WR

E have been asked by the National War Savings Committee to carry to our readers the message that spending for nonessentials is stealing labor and capital from the Government. It is a pleasure as well as a duty to comply with this request.

It does comparatively little good to draw money out of the bank and lend it to the Government. To be sure, the Government then has the immediate use of the money; but the bank's lending power is reduced by that amount, which means that some manufacturer of war munitions will find it so much more difficult to finance his enterprise.

The money that really counts is the money that we save by cutting down our consumption of goods. When we decide to make last

spring's hat serve another season, we not only have three or five dollars to invest in War Savings Stamps, but we help release a hatmaker for Government service. We have added the actual labor cost of the hat to the country's resources.

Old clothes can do much to help defeat Germany. And there are many things besides fashionable raiment that we can do without. Any reader of GOOD GOVERNMENT, with the aid of a pencil and a little concentrated thought, can probably total up a saving of fifty dollars a month or more, without disturbing his way of life or his ordinary comfort. But that is not enough. Those who stand knee-deep in Flanders mud, their "backs to the wall," with orders to die where they stand rather than give ground, have few enough comforts. We who are not privileged to stand with them can at least support them by refusing ourselves those pleasant self-indulgences of less perilous times. Every dollar we spend for non-essentials is equivalent to a dollar's worth of German bullets.

distinct, as they are to some extent in this country?

An interesting sidelight on the movement is contained in The Civilian, an employees' journal published at Ottawa:

It must be remembered that the reorganization of the civil service which must eventually follow the placing of the outside service under the jurisdiction of the Civil Service Commissioners cannot be effected over night. The Order-in-Council which the Government has passed is merely the thin end of the wedge. It is our duty to concentrate all our weight and influence in conjunction with the other units of the service in a supreme effort to disrupt the unholy alliance of the public service and patronage so completely as to render reconciliation in the future absolutely impossible.

It is difficult to understand why a young democratic country like Canada has been so slow in adopting civil service reform. Personal and partisan government, with all the entailed evils of the patronage system, culminated in Great Britain in the reign of George III, and was one of the efficient causes of the American Revolution. Trevelyan characterizes patronage by saying, "it was a system which, as its one achievement of the first order, brought about the American War and made England sick, once and for all, of the very name of personal government." It was but natural that the founders of the new government in America should strive to avoid the evils which had in a measure brought about the revolution. Their intention that the administrative officers of the government should hold office during good behavior is manifest, and was given practical effect by every administration during the first forty years of the life of the government. Unfortunately, the Four Years Tenure of Office Act of 1820 made possible the reintroduction of

In

the patronage evil, and the application of the theory that "to the victor belongs the spoils of the enemy." 1836 the provisions of this law, which had at first been confined to officers connected with the collection of revenue, were extended to include also all postmasters receiving a compensation of $1,000 or over per annum. The revenue service from being used for political services came to be used for corrupt purposes as well, with the result that in one administration frauds were practiced upon the government to the extent of $75,000,000.

Political retainers were selected for appointment, not on account of their ability to do work, but because they were followers of certain politicians; these public servants acknowledged no obligations except to those politicians, and their public duties were negligently and inefficiently performed. Thus grew a saturnalia of spoils and corruption which culminated in the assassination of a President. Acute conditions, not theories, give rise to reforms. In 1882 the Civil Service Act was introduced in the United States Senate, and passed the House on the fourth of January, 1883. The "classified" service to which the act applies had grown, in round numbers, from 14,000 positions in 1883 to some 80,000 in 1900, including practically all positions above the grade of mere laborer or workman. A very large class to which the act is expressly applicable, and which has been partly brought within its provisions, are fourth class postmasters, of whom there are between 70,000 and 80,000. Of these, 15,000 were classified in 1909.

We should not be discouraged if the reforms which the United States has taken 35 years to develop are not instituted over night. On the other hand, with the wealth of data available as a guide and inspiration in the carrying out of this important undertaking, the government and the Civil Service Commissioners should be able to wipe out in the very near future

most of the objectionable features of the present system. The elimination of patronage and the introduction of merit system will give the administrative officers of the Post Office Department the necessary leisure to administer this service in the best interest of the public.

Salary Increase Blocked

RE

EPRESENTATIVE MOON of Tennessee, chairman of the House postoffice committee, blocked plans that had been made to grant the members of the United States Civil Service Commission and Herbert Brown, chief of the United States Efficiency Bureau, increases in salary.

The legislative bill as reported to the House proposed that the salaries of the Commissioners should be $5,000 a year in the future. At the present time Chairman McIlhenny receives $4,500 and the other two Commissioners $4,000 each. Mr. Brown receives $4,000 and it was proposed to make his salary $5,000.

When those items in the bill were reached, Representative Moon made the point of order that they constituted new legislation, and that new legislation cannot be carried under the rules of the House on an appropriation measure.

March Financial Report

EPORTS on the League's war

Ractivities were the principal

features of the annual meeting held April 11, at the New York City Club. Thirty members of the League attended the meeting and the dinner.

Contrary to custom, there was no public meeting this year. It was found necessary to postpone the Baltimore meeting indefinitely, owing partly to local conditions; and it was felt that to begin anew and attempt to organize a large public meeting in some other city would be an unwarranted expenditure of effort. Furthermore, certain confidential matters were to be reported on, and the purposes of the League seemed to be best served by a quiet private meeting.

President Dana Re-elected

Richard Henry Dana, of Boston, was re-elected President, and Arthur R. Kimball, of Waterbury, Conn., was elected Chairman of the Council to succeed William B. Hale, who is occupied with important Government work in the Council of National Defense. A. S. Frissell was re-elected Treasurer, Theodore Hetzler, Assistant Treasurer, and George T. Keyes Secretary.

The following were elected VicePresidents:

*Edwin A. Alderman, Charlottesville, Va.

*Charles J. Bonaparte, Baltimore,

George Burnham, Jr., Philadelphia, Pa.

*Charles W. Eliot, Cambridge, Mass. *James Cardinal Gibbons, Baltimore, Md.

*George Gray, Wilmington, Del. *Arthur T. Hadley, Yale University. George McAneny, New York City. *Franklin MacVeagh, Chicago, Ill. *Theodore Roosevelt, Oyster Bay, N. Y.

*Moorefield Storey, Boston, Mass. Lucius B. Swift, Indianapolis, Ind. *William H. Taft, New Haven, Conn. Frederick C. Winkler, Milwaukee, Wis.

Md.

Elliot H. Goodwin