Ohio History Journal

OHIO'S CONTRIBUTION TO NATIONAL CIVIL

SERVICE REFORM

 

BY C. B. GALBREATH

 

Ohio is great in many ways. The achievements of

her sons are not confined to the spectacular vocations of

statesmanship and war. Piatt and Howells and other

writers have given her a respectable place in the lit-

erature of the republic. The Darling Nelly Gray of

our Hanby, the Dixie of our Emmett and the Softly

and Tenderly Jesus is Calling of our Thompson have

gone round the world and found an abiding place

wherever the tender melodies of the heart are played or

sung. Our Edison and our Brush have extended the

domain of invention, applied new forms of energy in

the field of productive industry and released the light

electric that rivals the day and flashes from the uplifted

torch of Liberty Enlightening the World. It was left

for the Wright brothers to achieve the impossible, to

first rise from the earth on wing, to ride the impalpable

air, to thrill the world with the "audacity of their design

and the miracle of its execution."

But these flowers do not bloom in the conservatories

of our orators and their choicest garlands are reserved

for the warriors and politicians--the statesmen, per-

haps, for Ohioans have risen to that eminence.

And what is a statesman? "One versed in public

affairs and government," says Webster; "a successful

politician," half ironically declares a writer; "a dead

politician," observes another; while a well known plat-

(176)

• 1
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 177

form orator offers this discriminating comparison: "A

statesman is one who tries to see what he can do for

this country; a politician is one who tries to see what

his country can do for him."

It is not necessary to say that Ohio has had poli-

ticians and some statesmen; and perhaps in a few in-

stances both have been united in the same character.

From the days of Arthur St. Clair and Edward Tiffin,

with one brief interval, party lines have been tautly

drawn in the Buckeye State. Our thoughts have ever

freely turned to the candidate for official preferment,

to the orator on the hustings, to the partisan leader in

the whirlwind of a political campaign. In piping times

of peace, he is our hero.

It is but a few years since we were wont in this

state, with the wildest enthusiasm, to celebrate the trans-

cendant prowess of such an one in a song with the

familiar refrain:

He's a great big man,

He's a politician.

In the popular opinion of the day it took a great

big man to be a politician, and the successful politician

was hailed as the great big man. Times have changed

a little and that song has been relegated to cold storage.

The great big men of today do not wish it to be under-

stood that they are so because they are politicians.

In these times the intelligent and independent citizen

asks the candidate for honors not, "What have you done

for your party?" but "What have you done for the

common-weal--for your country?" or "What do you

propose to do for your country?" The party is the inci-

Vol. XXXIII--12.

• 2
 

178     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

dent, the instrument, the necessary agent, perhaps; the

achievement, the service is everything.

With our past ambition for political eminence and

our enthusiasm for party names and party leaders, it

is a little singular that we should forget an Ohio states-

man, whose supreme achievement was unselfish and

patriotic in its inception, national in its scope and benef-

icent in its results. It is a fact, nevertheless. His

personality and gentlemanly qualities are still remem-

bered by his contemporaries and remain as a tradition

among their descendants, but as much cannot be said

for his constructive statesmanship. Nor is his work

forgotten because it died with him. The cause for

which he raised his voice and challenged all comers

in the arena of debate lives today. Every year adds

to its strength. Its virtues are proclaimed alike by pro-

gressives and conservatives.  It stands as a protest

against official incompetence, spoliation and corruption.

Without it, government would have degenerated into a

system of plunder and venality, and the foundations of

our Republic would have rotted away.

The champion of this cause was fortunate, as the

world views it, in his birth and early environment. His

paternal grandfather was a soldier of the Revolution,

aid-de-camp to General Nathaniel Greene and later

United States District Judge of Georgia, under appoint-

ment by Washington. The friend and partisan of Alex-

ander Hamilton, he was second to that ill-starred states-

man in the fatal duel at Weehawken. His father early

came to the Queen City of the West, where he attained

distinction and was elected to Congress in the famous

campaign of 1840 as an adherent of William Henry

Harrison. The son, in behalf of whose achievement

• 3
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 179

in statesmanship this sketch is written, was born in

Cincinnati in a home provided with all the comforts

and luxuries of that day, in the memorable year of

1825, when Lafayette was touring the young Republic

and our forefathers were celebrating with bonfires and

illuminations the semi-centennial jubilee of our national

independence.

A pupil in the Woodward High School at the age

of eight, and eight years afterward a graduate from the

Cincinnati College, under the presidency of William H.

McGuffey, he was later a special private student under

some of the leading professors of the West. At the

early age of nineteen he commenced a foreign tour for

study and observation that took him to the principal

cities of Europe, to the Holy Land and Egypt. He

lingered in Germany at Heidelberg and became a student

at its famous university. Returning in 1846, he was

admitted to the bar two years later and entered upon

the practice of the law.

At the age of twenty-two his associates, his studies

and his travels represented an aggregate of educational

opportunity and achievement rarely equalled, even in

our own time.

In his early political ideals and espousals, however,

he was not so fortunate. His father was a Whig.

The son became a Democrat. It is not a misfortune

under all circumstances to transfer party allegiance;

but in the days before the Civil War, when Wendell

Phillips was thundering at Faneuil Hall, when Abra-

ham Lincoln was raising his voice in the arena of

debate, when the great arm of the North was uplifted

to smite the institution of human slavery, it was un-

• 4
 

180     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

fortunate for a young man of culture, courage and

conscience to be arrayed on the other side.

The biographer of our subject commends the youth

for his independence in breaking away from the po-

litical faith of his fathers, and in this expression we

may heartily join, with the regret that he did not find

a better field for the exhibition of his talent and his

political ambition.

He first appears in the arena as a candidate from

Hamilton county for our state senate. He was elected

by a large majority. Before the close of his term, he

was nominated for Congress in the first Cincinnati

district and defeated. He was renominated two years

later and elected. When faction rent his party, he cast

his fortunes with the Douglas Democrats. When Lin-

coln was elected in 1860, this congressman was reelected

and arrayed himself with the opposition. He continued

to serve in the house until March 4, 1865. He was

one of the conspicuous and active members of Congress

through the stormy period of the war. Always gen-

tlemanly, persuasive and conservative, he nevertheless

opposed many of the measures of the Great Emancipator

and cried peace, peace when there was no peace.

His eulogist has much to say of his devotion to the

Union and his willingness to vote money and men for

its defense by force of arms, but is forced to admit that

during the crisis "he differed widely with the admin-

istration as to its policy and management of the war."

The fact is that through these years of stress and strug-

gle he was usually an obstructionist and much of a

thorn in the side of Abraham Lincoln.

To still further emphasize his attitude, in 1864,

while a member of Congress, he ran for vice-president

• 5
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 181 on the ticket with McClellan against Lincoln and John- son, on a platform with that unfortunate plank relating to the war for the preservation of the Union. And now you know who he was. His name was George H. Pendleton.1

Had his career ended here his public service might well have been forgotten. On the great moral and 1 For facts in regard to his early life and political career see Life and Speeches of George H. Pendleton by G. M. D. Bloss; also address of Honorable Isaac M. Jordan in memory of George H. Pendle- ton, Cincinnati, March 8. 1890.

• 6
 

182     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

political issues growing out of the war he was wrong,

sincerely and conscientiously so, but nevertheless wrong.

Such is the verdict of history. And from that verdict

there is no appeal. Like the judgments of the Lord, it

is true and righteous altogether.

In 1866, Mr. Pendleton was defeated for Congress

in his old district. Shortly afterward he advocated the

payment of government bonds in greenbacks, an idea

that attained great popularity for a time. In Congress

Mr. Pendleton had opposed the issue of greenbacks.

The announcement of his new idea subjected him to

the charge of inconsistency, against which he inveighed

with more satisfaction to himself than to the electorate.

In 1869, he made a canvass of Ohio for governor on

the "greenback idea" against Rutherford B. Hayes and

was defeated. Much was expected of him in the state

campaign of 1875, with the greenback idea as the para-

mount issue; but his part in that contest was disappoint-

ing to his party. He was evidently reluctant to go

as far as William Allen and Samuel Cary in support of

an inflated currency. Relegated to private life after

years of service in the exploitation of unsuccessful poli-

cies and issues, he had, at this time, it must be admitted,

slight claim to eminent statesmanship and enduring

fame. That it is never too late for a man of his equip-

ment to achieve both in a worthy cause, is proven by his

triumphs of succeeding years.

In that unique autobiographic contribution to his-

tory and literature, entitled "The Education of Henry

Adams," the author finds fault with the judgment of

his time which applauded the pretentions of mediocrity

and passed in silence the achievements of genuine merit

as exemplified in the statesmanship of George H. Pen-

• 7
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 183

dleton. We may rest assured that Henry Adams would

not have recorded such an observation prior to 1878.

In the state campaign of 1877, occurred the debate

between Pendleton and Garfield.² As this exemplifies

the character of the two men, a few sentences are here

quoted from a writer of the time.

During that historic debate, which covered every question

at issue between the two parties, and which was carried on in

the midst of a most exciting canvass, not a word was used by

either of these distinguished gladiators which could in any way

reflect upon the personal character of the other. One could at

times imagine he heard the sword and the battle-ax of the one

striking upon the mailed helmet and cuirass of the other, but

the argument was dignified and impersonal. These were great

party men contending for their party, their cause and their

principles; yet they were chivalrous.

This description calls to mind another historic de-

bate, on this same high plane, between William Mc-

Kinley and our most distinguished and popular fellow

citizen, Governor James E. Campbell.

In 1878 Pendleton was elected to the United States

Senate, in dignity and prestige and power, the first legis-

lative body of the world. It offered rare opportunity

for his eminent talents, and on the ladder of that oppor-

tunity he rose to the heights of statesmanship. He in-

terpreted the need of the hour,--the demand of the

future, and became for all time heir to the gratitude

of the republic.

The spoils system had been the bane of our insti-

tutions.  It threatened the very life of the republic.

It multiplied offices and sinecures and the wild and in-

discriminate rush for them. In our state and national

capitals it fed the mad enthusiasm of inauguration day

 

2 At Springfield, September 27, 1877.

• 8
 

184      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

and flooded the streets with cavalcades of shouting pa-

triots looking for jobs. It led and inspired all from

the ward worker to platform orator. In the midst of

the carnival of political debauchery it assumed a sinister

and monstrous form. Before it governors bowed, cabi-

net officers paid obeisance, the representatives of the

people groveled and dignified senators licked the dust.

A cloudless July morning. A flash out of the clear

sky. The hiss of the assassin's bullet, and our Garfield

was borne away mangled and bleeding to suffer linger-

ingly and to die. A group of students on an Ohio college

campus were standing still at the news of the awful

tragedy. The silence was broken by some one who said,

"The President was shot by Charles J. Guiteau;" but

that was not true. A little later another said, "The

President was shot by Charles J. Guiteau, a disappointed

office-seeker;" and that was only half true. Who was it,

what was it, that struck down Garfield and thrust him

"from the full tide of this world's interests, from its

hopes, its aspirations, its victories into the visible pres-

ence of death"?3 It was the spoils system, that nerved

the arm of the assassin, sent along it to the instrument

of death the impulse of hate and plunged the land into

silence and darkness and woe. "Strangulatus pro re-

publica," said the stricken man as he tossed on his couch

of pain. Yes, slaughtered for the Republic, tortured,

martyred--our costly sacrifice to the demon of greed

and spoliation and factional hate and partisan plunder.

It sometimes takes a thunder-clap to arouse us to a

sense of neglected duty. It took the earthquake shock

of a World War to start us in the quest of a universal

 

3 Blaine, James G. Memorial address on life and public services

of James A. Garfield, House of Representatives, February 27, 1882.

• 9
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 185

and enduring peace. In 1881 it took the life of a

president to start political parties on the road to the

redemption of platform pledges with regard to the civil

service. Garfield did not die in vain. The conscience

of our guilty nation was touched. A movement to miti-

gate the evils of the spoils system was inaugurated

in the United States Senate under the leadership of

George H. Pendleton. To his credit be it said, on this

question he took up arms against the traditions of his

own party and the demoralizing and debasing practices

of both parties.

A brief review of the progress of civil service re-

form in the United States may not be out of place

here. Such a survey is appropriate in view of the fact

that famous Ohioans, officially prominent in the service

of the nation, had much to do with the inauguration

and promotion of this policy.

From the organization of political parties in this

country there has been a temptation to use the appointive

power to reward faithful partisans. In the earlier years

of the Republic, rewards for partisan service were com-

paratively few and far between. They varied somewhat

under different administrations. It was left for Presi-

dent Andrew Jackson to apply very generally the prin-

ciple in politics that "to the victor belong the spoils,"

although he did not originate that declaration so often

attributed to him. Jackson was severely criticised for

the inauguration of the spoils system on a grand scale.

His successors, however, for the most part followed his

example, and the tendency was then as it is today in

other matters when an act of the appointing power is

criticised to excuse it on the ground that it is not so

bad as a similar exercise of the power by a predecessor,

• 10
 

186     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

The Civil War and the stirring events leading up

to it crowded out of the public thought the reform of the

civil service system and other matters of minor interest.

At the close of the war the Nation was enormously in

debt and retrenchment in expenditures was imperatively

demanded in order that the payroll of the government

might be reduced and its obligations might be met.

In 1864, Charles Sumner, then United States sena-

tor from Massachusetts, introduced a bill "to provide

for the greater efficiency of the civil service." This

bill authorized the appointment of a board of examiners,

competitive examinations, promotion by seniority and

removal for good cause only. The bill did not reach

a vote.

On May 25, 1868, Thomas Allen Jencks, congress-

man from Rhode Island, presented in Congress an elab-

orate report which is generally considered as the "start-

ing point of civil service reform in this country." The

plan recommended and finally included in a bill intro-

duced by Mr. Jencks, followed closely that authorized

in the bill introduced by Sumner. It was ably discussed

by Mr. Jencks, who was a man of wealth, culture and

influence and highly respected by his associates. Some-

what to the surprise of Congress and those interested

throughout the country it received very substantial sup-

port and came within seven votes of passing the house.

In the meantime able advocates of the reform of

the civil service began to announce their attitude. Prom-

inent among these were George William Curtis and Carl

Schurz. In spite of this evidence of progress, how-

ever, the outlook for effective legislation was not

encouraging.

• 11
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 187

Shortly after the failure of the Jencks bill substan-

tial aid to the movement came from an unexpected quar-

ter. General Ulysses S. Grant, shortly after his election

to the presidency, let it be known that he favored the

reform. In subsequent years his early advocacy seems

in large measure to have been forgotten by the people.

His close association in the presidency with such men

as Conkling, Logan and other practical politicians has

left the impression that like his friends and advisors he

favored rotation in office. The centenary of the birth

of General Grant was appropriately celebrated in his

native state, Ohio, April 27-29, 1922. Able addresses

reviewing his services to the country in war and peace

were delivered by President Harding and Senators Wil-

lis and Pomerene, at his birthplace and other points in

southern Ohio where he spent his boyhood days. These

addresses, however, contained no reference to the fact

that he was the first of all the presidents of the United

States to recommend to Congress the enactment of laws

for an effective reform   of the civil service.  In his

second annual message to Congress, December 5, 1870,

he made the following recommendation:

Always favoring practical reform, I respectfully call your

attention to one abuse of long standing which I would like to

see remedied by this Congress. It is a reform in the civil

service of the country. I would have it go beyond the mere

fixing of the tenure of office of clerks and employees who do

not require "the advice and consent of the senate" to make

their appointments complete. I would have it govern, not the

tenure, but the manner of making all appointments. There is

no duty which so much embarrasses the Executive and heads

of departments as that of appointments, nor is there any such

arduous and thankless labor imposed on senators and representa-

tives as that of finding places for constituents. The present

system does not secure the best men, and often not even fit

men for public place. The elevation and purification of the civil

• 12
 

188       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

 

service of the government will be hailed with approval by the

whole people of the United States.4

Assuredly this is a frank statement that must have

been gratifying to the friends of civil service reform.

It is sincere in tone and was followed by subsequent

declarations that indicated clearly President Grant's

deep interest in this subject. One year later, in his third

annual message to Congress, he followed up his initial

recommendation with an encouraging statement of

progress:

In my message to Congress one year ago I urgently rec-

ommended a reform in the civil service of the country. In con-

formity with that recommendation Congress in the ninth section

of "An act making appropriations for sundry civil expenses of

the government and for other purposes," approved March 3,

1871, gave the necessary authority to the Executive to inaug-

urate a civil service reform, and placed upon him the responsi-

bility of doing so. Under the authority of said act I convened

a board of gentlemen eminently qualified for the work to devise

rules and regulations to effect the needed reform. Their labors

are not yet complete, but it is believed that they will succeed

in devising a plan that can be adopted to the great relief of the

Executive, the heads of departments and members of Congress,

and which will redound to the true interest of the public service.

At all events, the experiment shall have a fair trial.5

 

In his fourth annual message to Congress, Decem-

ber 2, 1872, he again reported progress and urged addi-

tional legislation:

A earnest desire has been felt to correct abuses which have

grown up in the civil service of the country through the de-

fective method of making appointments to office. Heretofore

federal offices have been regarded too much as the reward of

political services. Under authority of Congress rules have been

4 Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents,

Vol. VII, p. 109.

5 Ibid., 155.

• 13
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 189

 

established to regulate the tenure of office and the mode of

appointment. It can not be expected that any system of rules

can be entirely effective and prove a perfect remedy for exist-

ing evils until they have been thoroughly tested by actual

practice and amended according to the requirements of the

service. During my term of office it shall be my earnest en-

deavor to so apply the rules as to secure the greatest possible

reform in the civil service of the government, but it will re-

quire the direct action of Congress to render the enforcement

of the system binding upon my successors; and I hope that the

experience of the past year, together with appropriate legisla-

tion by Congress, may reach a satisfactory solution of this

question and secure to the public service for all time a practical

method of obtaining faithful and efficient officers and em-

ployees.6

President Grant's earnest and persistent effort in

this new   field of executive endeavor entitles him    to

honor as a progressive statesman whose policy in re-

gard to the civil service was in harmony with the

advanced thought of his time.

After his re-election to the presidency, in his in-

augural address, which was brief, he still found room

to express his continued interest in this reform:

It has been, and is, my earnest desire to correct abuses

that have grown up in the civil service of the country. To

secure this reformation rules regulating methods of appoint-

ment and promotion were established and have been tried. My

efforts for such reformation shall be continued to the best of

my judgment. The spirit of the rules adopted will be main-

tained.⁷

On April 18, 1874, President Grant transmitted the

report of the Civil Service Commission "authorized by

the act of Congress of March 3, 1871." He still ex-

pressed undiminished faith in the establishment of a

merit system and asks Congress to continue appropria-

6 Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents,

Vol. VII, p. 205.

7 Ibid., p. 223.

• 14
 

190      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

tions for the support of the work of the Civil Service

Commission.

In his annual message of December 7, 1874, Presi-

dent Grant expressed his discouragement resulting from

the failure of Congress to carry out his recommen-

dations with reference to the reform of the civil service.

"The rules adopted to improve the Civil Service of the

government," he declared, "have been adhered to as

closely as has been practicable with the opposition with

which they meet. The effect, I believe, has been bene-

ficial on the whole, and has tended to the elevation of the

service. But it is impracticable to maintain them with-

out direct and positive support of Congress."⁸ He

seemed sensitive to criticism of what had been done to

improve the service and disappointed at the action of

Congress. "Under these circumstances," he continued,

"I announce that if Congress adjourns without positive

legislation on the subject of 'Civil Service reform' I will

regard such action as a disapproval of the system and

will abandon it, except so far as to require examinations

for certain appointees, to determine their fitness. Com-

petitive examinations will be abandoned."⁹

The only action on the part of Congress thus far had

been a provision in an appropriation bill in 1871 author-

izing the President "to prescribe such rules and regu-

lations for the admission of persons into the civil service

of the United States as will best promote the efficiency

thereof." It further gave him power, "to employ suit-

able persons to conduct said inquiries," and appropriated

$25,000 to inaugurate this service. The appropriation

 

8 Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents,

Vol. VII, p. 300.

9 Ibid., p. 301.

• 15
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 191

was not renewed at the end of two years and the

President was left without means to proceed with the

reform in which he was so deeply interested. At the

same time Congress recognized the rules that had al-

ready been established by the enactment of a law pro-

hibiting the assessment of the salaries of government

employes for political purposes. This represented the

sum total of what was accomplished under the Grant

administration.

In the presidential campaign of 1876 the two leading

political parties pledged themselves to Civil Service re-

form. Rutherford B. Hayes was known to be especially

friendly to the movement. In his inaugural address he

devoted two paragraphs to the subject. Among other

things he said:

I ask the attention of the public to the paramount necessity

of reform in our Civil Service -- a reform not merely as to

certain abuses and practices of so-called official patronage which

have come to have the sanction of usage in the several depart-

ments of the government, but a change in the system of ap-

pointment itself; a reform that shall be thorough, radical and

complete; a return to the principles and practices of the founders

of the government.10

He further directed attention to the fact that in the

preceding political campaign both parties had been

pledged to civil service reform and accepted the mandate

"as the expression of the united voice and will of the

whole country upon this subject."¹¹ His plea for a merit

system was followed with the famous declaration of the

duty that came to him as chief executive of the nation,

concluding with the expression that has become a classic:

 

10 Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents,

Vol. VII, p. 315.

11 Ibid., p. 445.

• 16
 

192       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

 

The President of the United States of necessity owes his

election to office to the suffrage and zealous labors of a political

party, the members of which cherish with ardor and regard as

of essential importance the principles of their party organiza-

tion; but he should strive to be always mindful of the fact that

he serves his party best who serves his country best.¹²

In his first message to Congress December 3, 1877,

President Hayes again drew attention to the necessity

of reform in the Civil Service and the demand for

such reform on the part of the two leading political

parties. In conclusion he said:

I have fully believed these declarations and demands to be

the expression of a sincere conviction of the intelligent masses

of the people upon the subject, and that they should be rec-

ognized and followed by earnest and prompt action on the part

of the legislative and executive departments of the government

in pursuance of the purpose indicated.13

In his annual message of December 1, 1879, the

President gave much space to civil service reform    and

its growth in popular favor. "The grave evils," he de-

clared, "and the perils of a partisan spoils system of

appointment to office and of office tenure are now gen-

erally recognized."¹⁴ He drew attention to previous rec-

ommendations of President Grant, devoted space to a

discussion of what has been attempted to date to im-

prove conditions and concluded by asking Congress "to

make the necessary appropriations for the resumption

of the work of the Civil Service Commission."¹⁵ He

declared that economy would "be promoted by author-

izing a moderate compensation to persons in the public

 

12 Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents,

Vol. VII, p. 445.

13 Ibid., p. 465.

14 Ibid., p. 561.

15 Ibid., p. 564.

• 17
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 193

service who may perform extra labor upon or under the

commission, as the executive may direct."16

In his message of December 6, 1880, he draws at-

tention to the extension of the merit system to the

"custom-houses and post-offices of the larger cities of

the country." He reported that "In the city of New

York over 2,000 positions in the civil service have been

subject in their appointments and tenure of place to the

operation of published rules for this purpose during

the past two years. The results of these practical trials

have been very satisfactory, and have confirmed my

opinion in favor of this system of selection."17

Under date of February 28, 1881, President Hayes

transmitted the report of Dorman B. Eaton, Chairman

of the Civil Service Commission, on the results of the

application of the merit system to the postoffice and

custom house of the city of New York, and declares

that the result of a practical test of the system had

been very gratifying.

While President Hayes throughout his administra-

tion manifested a lively interest in the reform of the

Civil Service his recommendations to Congress did not

meet with a cordial response and no legislation on the

subject was accomplished in advance of what had been

secured under the administration of President Grant.

The election of President James A. Garfield was

hailed with satisfaction by the civil service reformers.

He had on various occasions expressed his approval of

the merit system. He was one of the most scholarly

 

16 Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents,

Vol., VII, p. 565.

17 Ibid., p. 636.

Vol XXXIII -- 13.

• 18
 

194      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

of all our Presidents. It was believed that his influence

with Congress would powerfully aid in the enactment

of an effective civil service law. In his inaugural ad-

dress he declared that the civil service could never be

placed on a satisfactory basis until it was regulated by

such a law. Beyond this, however, the paragraph that

he devoted to civil service reform was guarded and in-

definite.18 He evidently reserved for his message to

Congress a fuller statement of his views and a more

specific intimation of the provisions that should be in-

cluded in the desired legislation. Unfortunately his

tragic death prevented the statement of his policy in a

message to Congress. The manner of his death, how-

ever, was a powerful agency for the overthrow of the

system responsible for it.

It must be borne in mind that while George H.

Pendleton turned his back upon the traditions and prac-

tices of his party he kept strictly within the platform

pledges of that party. Beginning with the year 1872,

the Democratic party in its national conventions had

gone on record in no uncertain language, in favor of

the reform of the civil service. The platform on which

Greeley was nominated demanded the merit system and

denounced the then existing order in the following

terms:

 

The civil service of the government has become a mere

instrument of party tyranny and personal ambition, and an

object of selfish greed. It is a scandal and reproach upon

tree institutions and breeds a demoralization dangerous to the

perpetuity of a republican government.

 

18 Richardson, James D., Messages and Papers of the Presidents,

Vol. VIII, p. 11.

• 19
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 195

Succeeding conventions of the party in even more

forceful and definite language demanded civil service

reform and condemned the spoils system.

In plain and simple terms, what is the spoils system ?

It is the giving of official positions in return for party

service. It says to the ward worker, the caucus manipu-

lator and professional vote getter, "You help elect me

mayor or congressman or governor, and I will give

you an office in return. I will either throw cut some

one to make a place for you or have a new office created

for you." In short, it is a system of legalized corruption.

In the language of the San Francisco Call, "The spoils

system declares that men shall make a living out of

politics. It implies that they shall give or withhold their

votes because a valuable consideration has been offered

less disgraceful than outright bribery, it is more per-

nicious, for the briber pays his obligations out of his

own pocket; the spoilsman makes the public pay them."

To this one might add that while the briber cor-

rupts the voter, the spoilsman, as a rule, through the

appointment of inefficient men, not only corrupts the

voter but demoralizes the public service.

Every time an agent of the government appoints an

incompetent man, or any man, for the sole purpose of

paying a political debt he sets a corrupt example for

the whole people. And this is none the less true when

done without sinister motive. The corrupt practices of

high finance and debased politics are natural and

logical results of the spoils system against which Pendle-

ton inveighed.

From a purely business point of view, the supreme

folly and criminal waste of such a system is apparent.

• 20
 

196     Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

How long would a great railroad system operate suc-

cessfully if every two years a new president of the road

should be elected, who in turn should fill all positions

on the basis of political service, drive out the trained

and experienced men and put the vote getters in charge ?

There would be jobs and sinecures and fancy salaries;

there would be wrecks and broken bones and mangled

bodies that would make humanity shudder. What would

happen if the same policy were applied to our public

schools and colleges and universities? In a compara-

tively short time there would be chaos and confusion

intolerable and disastrous. And yet prior to 1883, the

vast and complex machinery of our government was ad-

ministered on the basis of spoils.

As already intimated, the spoils system is to be con-

demned because it blunts the moral sense of the citizen

and loots the public treasury under the guise of the

law. One of its fruits was a goodly number of influ-

ential citizens with two codes, one for dealing with pri-

vate and another for dealing with public affairs. It

is even said that in those degenerate days there were

men who would not take a penny from a neighbor, even

in the dark, but who still seemed to think it was not

very wrong to steal a little from the state.

The struggle for place, the demoralization of the

public service and the tragic result to which reference

has been made led to a widespread demand for a reform

of the civil service. With this George H. Pendleton

was in hearty sympathy and he was prompt to respond.

He devoted his influence and energies to end this

saturnalia of spoliation by the establishment and en-

forcement of the merit system. In his speech in the

United States Senate in December, 1881, he said:

• 21
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 197

This spoils system opens up to every thoughtful man, nay

to every man who will see, even without thinking, visions of

wrong, injustice, brutality, wastefulness, recklessness, fraud,

peculation, degradation of persons and parties, which have

driven from public life much of the cultivated intellect and

refined morality of the country, and fill even the most hopeful

mind with sadness for much in the present and grave anxiety

for the future.

Again in the same speech he said of this system:

It is the prolific parent of fraud, corruption and brutality.

* * * It lowers the tone and degrades the sentiment, not

only of the public men, but, more important still, of the whole

people behind them.

This arraignment he followed up with an able

presentation of the merit system proposed in his bill.

If his vision of what he hoped his measure would

accomplish, has not been fully realized in the almost

forty years that have elapsed, it is the ideal toward

which, in spite of temporary delays and reverses, the

practices of state and nation are slowly but assuredly

moving.

A year later, in December, 1882, he again spoke in

favor of his bill for the enactment of which he had

labored unceasingly. In his brief speech he said in

part:

The existing system which, for want of a better name, I

call the "spoils system," must be killed or it will kill the Republic.

I believe that it is impossible to maintain free institutions in

this country upon any basis of that sort. I am no prophet of

evil, I am not a pessimist in any sense of the word, but I do

believe that, if the present system goes on until 50,000,000 peo-

ple shall have grown into 100,000,000 and 140,000 officers shall

have grown into 300,000, with their compensation in proportion,

and all shall depend upon the accession of one party or the

other to the presidency and to the executive functions, the

presidency of this country, if it shall last in name so long, will

• 22
 

198      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

 

be put up for sale to the highest bidder, even as in ancient

Rome the imperial crown was awarded to those who could raise

the largest fund.

Our population has grown to over 100,000,000, and

there were in the classified service along in 1917, 327,000

persons. In 1918, this number had reached approxi-

mately 600,000, due largely to the World War. The

number reported in 1923 was 411,398.19

The civil service reform movement, as we have

seen, did not originate with Pendleton. The bill that

he introduced was largely the work of the National

Civil Service Reform Association and its president, Dor-

man B. Eaton. Similar measures had previously been

introduced and considered in Congress. But neverthe-

less to Pendleton is due the credit for sponsorship and

chief influence in the enactment of the national civil

service law. The peculiar political condition at this

time and his relation to it should not be forgotten.

After the tragic death of Garfield, following the bitter

factional fight in the Republican party, the congressional

elections went strongly Democratic. The prospect for

Democratic victory at the coming presidential election

was bright. The practical politicians of that party very

naturally did not relish the prospect of the enactment of

a civil service law that would perpetuate in office many

thousand Republican appointees. If there was to be

any civil service law, they much preferred that it be

deferred until their party came into power, and their

hungry friends and retainers were comfortably estab-

lished in the berths for which they had waited so long.

This feeling was shared by Democrats in Congress. Un-

der these circumstances, the leadership of George H.

 

19 United States Civil Service Commission. Report, 1923, p. 187.

• 23
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 199

Pendleton, in the movement for civil service reform,

was most fortunate if not absolutely essential to the

enactment of the law.

Just a word, by way of parenthetical diversion, for

the "practical politicians." Hard names should not be

applied to them. The rank and file are firmly con-

vinced that they are rendering their country a patriotic

service in the support of their party and that they are

entitled to recognition for this service. They were and

where they are still found are the product of a system

for which they should not be held responsible.

After all, the "workers," those who come into actual

contact with the voters and arouse "patriotic party in-

terest" are perhaps less reprehensible than the "higher

ups" who contribute cash lavishly and claim their re-

ward in consulships, ministerial posts, ambassadorships

and other appointive positions of trust and honor.

Senator Pendleton was aware that his action was

not pleasing to many Democratic party workers, to "the

boys in the trenches," but believing that his course was

right and that it would ultimately inure to the benefit

of his party, he never wavered in the fight that he

led for the merit system. His bill passed the Senate

December 27, 1882, by a vote of 38 to 5; it passed the

House January 5, 1883, by a vote of 155 to 47, and

was approved by President Arthur January 16, 1883.

For his courageous support of the measure he in-

curred the ill will of "the boys" in Ohio, and they quietly

prepared to retaliate. When his senatorial term came

to an end he suddenly found that he had a large fight

on his hands in the legislature which was controlled

by his party. "The boys" pitted against him the old

• 24
 

200       Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

war horse, Durban Ward. The fight waxed warm, for

"the boys" were after the scalp of Pendleton.

January 8, 1884, was the date set for the caucus

of the Democratic members of the General Assembly

of Ohio to determine who should be nominated to suc-

ceed Senator Pendleton. There were three candidates

for the honor, Henry B. Payne, Durban Ward and Pen-

dleton who sought to succeed himself. The contest be-

came exciting and charges of bribery were freely made.

The situation became so tense that Ex-senator Allen

G. Thurman, always deeply interested in the welfare of

his party, felt called upon to issue the day of the caucus

the following letter that expresses his view of the con-

test and is here reproduced in full:

I have nothing against either of the candidates. They are

all men of ability. My personal relations with each of them

have always been friendly and pleasant. But there is some-

thing that shocks me in the idea of crushing men like Pendleton

and Ward, who have devoted the best portions of their lives to

the maintenance of Democracy, by the combination against them

of personal hatred and overgrown wealth. I hear Payne men

say: "We can not support Pendleton because we disapprove of

his civil service reform bill," forgetting that convention after

convention of the Democratic party, both State and National,

had resolved in favor of civil service reform, and also for-

getting that the Republicans now in office are just as liable to

be turned out as if the Pendleton bill had never passed. I do

not advocate that bill. I think it ought to be amended or re-

pealed; but I would not slaughter a life-long Democrat because

in a long public service he happened to make one mistake.

But if these gentlemen can not support Pendleton, why

can not they support Ward? He is not responsible for the

civil service reform bill. Indeed, I have always understood

that he disapproves of it. That he is a man of ability, every

man must admit; that he has performed immense labor for our

party, no one will deny. Why, then, prefer Payne to him? The

answer, I fear, is perfectly plain. There never has been any

machine politics in the Democratic party of Ohio. We have,

as a party, been freer from bossism than any party that ever

• 25
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 201

 

existed. But some men seem to thing that we ought to have a

machine, amply supplied with money to work it, and under ab-

solute control of a boss or bosses, to dictate who shall and who

shall not receive the honors and rewards within the gift of the

party. To set up such a machine it is necessary, in the first

place, to kill the men who have heretofore enjoyed the con-

fidence of the party--the men whose ability, hard labor, and

principles did so much to keep the party together in the terrible

ordeal through which it has passed. I am unwilling to see this

done. It does not concern me personally, for I am a mere

private citizen, having no expectation or wish to ever hold office

again. But although I have never sought for revenge upon my

enemies in the party--if I have had any--on the other hand,

I have never deserted my friends, and I do not want to be

called on to be a pall-bearer at their political funerals. I want

to see our officers elected in the good old-fashioned Democratic

mode, and not by some new-fangled mode that, to say the least

of it, wears an evil-omened and inauspicious aspect. I want to

see all true Democrats have a fair chance, according to their

merits, and do not want to see a political cut-throat bossism in-

augurated for the benefit of a close party corporation or syn-

dicate.²⁰

Allen O. Myers, state representative from Franklin

County and strongly opposed to the election of Payne,

in his account of this contest speaks thus of the principal

reason brought forth by Democratic members of the

General Assembly for opposing Pendleton:

The argument used against Mr. Pendleton, was that he was

the author of the civil service law. But the platform upon

which the state ticket had been elected, and the legislature had

been carried, was the most emphatic endorsement of civil service

reform, that the Democratic party of Ohio had ever made. The

pretext for opposing Mr. Pendleton was the most flimsy and

pitiable that could be presented. This feature of the Senatorial

canvass only demonstrates the insincerity of political parties

and promises.²¹

Opinions still differ as to what extent this argument

was sincere or a matter of excuse. It seems clear, how-

20 Columbus Evening Dispatch, January 8, 1884.

21 Myers, Allen O., Bosses and Boodle in Ohio Politics, p. 228.

• 26
 

202      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications

ever, that members of the General Assembly relied upon

it to justify their action with their constituents and it

may be truly said that Pendleton made the fight for

principle and paid the penalty. He was defeated in the

Democratic caucus and Payne succeeded him in the

Senate.

When the civil service bill was up for consideration,

friends warned him of its effect on his party. In answer

he said:

It has been said that the abandonment of the spoils system

will exclude Democrats from office when the day of our vic-

tory shall come. I do not think so. On the contrary I believe

the adoption of this policy as our party creed will hasten the

day of the victory of our party, and its adoption as a law will

under any administration fill many offices with Democrats. I

think it will bring to our aid very many men not hitherto of our

political faith, who believe this reform a vital question in our

politics.

In 1884 Grover Cleveland was elected President.

He won on a margin of less than 1,500 votes in the

state of New York. The result depended upon a num-

ber of influences, all of which were necessary to his

success. He had the support of Harper's Weekly and

the civil service reformers, the so-called mugwumps, of

that day. Without their aid he could not have been

elected. George H. Pendleton and his civil service act

were very material influences in bringing about this

result. He knew what he was talking about when he

said, "It will bring to our aid very many men not here-

tofore of our political faith who believe this reform a

vital question in our politics." He helped to win the

national victory for his party, but fell outside of the

breast-works at the hands of "the boys."

• 27
 

Ohio's Contribution to National Civil Service Reform 203

In 1885 he was appointed by President Cleveland

minister to Germany, a post that he filled with credit to

himself and his country. On his way back to America,

he died at Brussels, Belgium, November 24, 1889. He

was survived by two daughters and a son, Frank Key

Pendleton, a successful lawyer and eminent jurist of

New York City. His wife, whose maiden name was

Alice Key, was a daughter of Francis Scott Key, the

author of The Star Spangled Banner. Her death by

accident, while her husband was in the foreign service,

almost prostrated him. From the shock he never fully

recovered.

George H. Pendleton was familiarly known as "Gen-

tleman George," and it is the testimony alike of sup-

porters and opponents that he was at all times and

under all circumstances the perfect gentleman. High

tribute is paid to his domestic virtues, his eminent

ability and his personal honor that was never sullied.

His great achievement, the civil service law, still

stands. In spite of all assaults, it is today more firmly

established than ever before. It will never be repealed.

Its place is as secure as if it were embedded in the con-

stitution. It has been extended and municipalities and

states are following the example of the national gov-

ernment. We do not realize what we owe to the merit

system. Its preventive agency is like that of pure water.

We are conscious of slight defects in the latter without

thought of its continuous contribution to our health and

the health of the community. So with the merit system.

We notice its defects, its limitations, its faulty admin-

istration without a thought of what would happen if

we went back to conditions of forty years ago. If the

great number of positions under the protection of the

• 28
 

204      Ohio Arch. and Hist. Society Publications national civil service law were, as of old, thrown into the lottery of a presidential campaign, it would rock the Republic to its foundations. It is easy often from surface indications or the noise of interested parties to conclude that the civil service law, or any law that runs counter to the interest of a considerable number of people, is a farce. On the whole, however, it must be conceded that the merit system is a pronounced success, and the law that established it is the greatest achievement in constructive statesman- ship to the credit of an Ohioan since the close of the Civil War.

• 29