appears to be. Is the rule 'detur digniori,'" he asks, "founded on a truth so evident, and on maxims of such universal application, that we ought to apply it to 16,000 public officers at once? It is, at least, a perfect novelty. It is a rule never hitherto enforced in any commonwealth, except that of Utopia. . . Can it be that all the world is and has always been wrong about a matter so level, as it might seem, to the capacity of the least wise, as well as of the wisest. The world we live in is not, I think, half moralised enough for the acceptance of such a scheme as this." And he deprecates the change on the ground that patronage is one of the more valuable "remuncrations" of the higher offices of state, and that by reducing it you render office less acceptable, and consequently narrow still more the range of choice of ministers, already so confined as to be a serious evil. But if this argument of Sir James Stephen is good at all, it is good to a much greater extent. And what the effect of it is if fully carried out, may be seen in a commonwealth some distance on this side of Utopia, that, namely, of the United States. There the principle of "place to party friends" is fully recognised and put in practice by an almost universal sweeping out of subordinates," to make room for political supporters, on the advent of a new administration and rightly, too, says Mr. Marcy, the present Secretary of State, for "to the victors belong the spoils!" But there at any rate the moral gain would appear to have been anything but evident, if credence may be given to native as well as foreign censors. may be worthy of note that the Irish officials all refer with marked delight to the beneficial effect which such an abolition of patronage would have in eradicating the wretched class of place-hunters who now haunt the "Castle," and wear out their days in unmanly dependence on the dispensers of place or the possessors of influence.

66

It

Going beyond the service, an obvious effect of such a system of competition is the stimulus it would undoubtedly give to education, from the highest almost to the lowest grades. On this all are agreed. Professors at the universities, schoolmasters, school-inspectors, and the friends of education generally, unite in anticipating that it will operate widely, deeply, and beneficially on the education of the country; raising the character of the schools, exciting the teachers to higher efforts, and extending the range of studies and giving a more practical turn to the teaching in the schools for the middle and upper classes. A further, and not the least important, consideration is, that it would open a new carcer to talent. On this there is no necessity to dwell, Every one almost has within his own experience seen the advantage which would be afforded by another profession being available to men of liberal education; or if his own observation has not supplied an instance, the most confined reading of contemporary biography will have shown how often it must occur that young men of cultivated intellect, but, it may be, of over scrupulous minds, when the time for selecting a profession has arrived, shrink from the bar, and conceive themselves unfit for the church, or perhaps cannot bring themselves to sign its articles; yet possess neither the interest nor the wealth which would enable them to enter with a fair prospect of success in the other professions, or

engage in commerce, and to whom the Civil Service would offer just the opening of which they would be glad to avail themselves, and the kind of occupation for which they are most fitted.

In fine, to borrow the words of Mr. Mill-" When we add to these considerations the extraordinary stimulus which would be given to mental cultivation in its most important branches, not solely by the hope of prizes to be obtained by means of it, but by the effect of the national recognition of it as the exclusive title to participation in the conduct of so large and conspicuous a portion of the national affairs; and when we further think of the great and salutary moral revolution, descending to the minds of almost the lowest classes, which would follow the knowledge that Government (to people in general the most trusted exponent of the ways of the world,) would henceforth bestow its gifts according to merit, and not to favour; it is difficult to express in any language which would not appear exaggerated, the benefits which, as it appears to me, would ultimately be the consequences of the successful execution of this scheme."

We have now to state the leading objections which have been urged against the plan of a free competing examination. The first broad objection is, that it would abridge the prerogative of the Crown. But this is one of those vague charges which may be brought against any alteration in the conduct of the public service; and really resolves itself into the more definite and oft-repeated, though not more valid, objection, that it would transfer patronage from the responsible officers of the Crown, and delegate it to an irresponsible board of examiners. This objection, however, as Mr. Mill forcibly observes, "ignores the whole essence of the plan. As at present conducted, the bestowal of appointments is patronage. But the conferring of certificates of eligibility would not be patronage, but a judicial act." Patronage would, in fact, be abolished, not transferred. Whether it shall be abolished is of course the whole point in dispute; its transference is nowhere suggested. As we have seen, Sir James Stephen regards patronage as an important portion of the recompense of high office, and deprecates its reduction as likely to render the class of persons who usually form the Government of the country less ready to accept the otherwise ill-requited anxieties and toils of high office. That patronage as hitherto exercised in the Civil Service has done much to retard its efficiency, is evident, and is scarcely denied, but it is suggested that with the checks afforded by the new central Board of Examiners, it will in future work better.

It is said further, that this plan would take away from the Crown the power of rewarding special services by the gift of a place, or marking its sense of meritorious conduct in an old public servant by the nomination of his son to a clerkship. Unquestionably, there appears to be considerable force in this objection. Such an appointment is often one of the most graceful rewards which royalty can bestow; and the public always receives with pleasure the announcement that a person has been recompensed for special service by a suitable place, and almost equally so that the merit of a father is acknowledged by provision for his son. For the first class, however,

the Commissioners' plan in part provides, by recommending that to the upper offices-such as would be the special rewards for special services-persons of admitted eminence shall still be appointed without examination, subject to an official record being made of the circuinstances under which the appointment took place, and being included in an Annual Report to Parliament. For the second class no such provision is compatible with the plan. They must take their chance with the crowd. But even their case is not hopeless. After passing a successful examination, it is clear that the son of an old public servant will, in his early habits and training, and the assistance derivable from the official knowledge and experience of his father and his friends, have many advantages over his competitors in the race for promotion. He would, in fact, start with the professional stock in trade which a stranger would have to accumulate slowly and laboriously. This, of course, may be urged as going to prove the importance of securing the services of such a class of officers; and experience, it may be added, has shown that the sons of civil servants have proved themselves above the average of official utility, while some have raised themselves by their talent and application to the highest offices. All this we readily admit, and we admit also that it would be a serious objection to any plan that it would be likely to deprive the country of the services of such men. But of that there is little probability. That would be an egregious examination for which such men could not prepare with a more than average chance of success. But a proper examination would undoubtedly shut out the incompetent sons of public servants who now receive appointments as a consequence of their father's competence-a very numerous class unfortunately. For their case we know of no remedy. They must be content to suffer for their country's good, as their country has long suffered for theirs. For the future it may be well to try another method of rewarding good service. Let merit receive its recompense in promotion and honorary distinction; and if these be inadequate, in pecuniary reward. As the merit is personal, so let the payment be. If that be sufficient, there will seldom be need of further provision. At any rate it hardly appears worth while to retain patronage, in order that the good service of a father may entail ill-service from the son.

Another objection to which much prominence has been given, and on which Sir James Stephen and Mr. Waddington expatiate at some length, is that the prizes offered by the Civil Service are not sufficiently high to attract the superior class of men anticipated by the Commissioners. But this is rather an objection to the arrangements within the service than to the mode of admission to it. If the service be not adequately paid, the rate of payment should be raised. If it only require to be recruited from a class below "the ablest and most ambitious youths of the country," or will only pay for the services of such, open competition may still afford the best means of providing the most capable from that class. But the other parts of the planthe division of mechanical and intellectual labour, promotion by merit as the rule, the apportioning of staff appointments within the offices, &c., are especially intended to render the service more attractive to a

superior class of men, and to open a career for eminence within it. And if this career be opened-with the certainty of a sufficient provision for life upon good conduct, if even the prizes, which can of course fall to the lot of but few, be missed-it will no longer be the case, as Sir James Stephen says it now is, that the money to be earned is the only attraction of the Civil Service. The good old patriotic feeling-seldom wanting in a young man-that to devote life to the service of one's country is an honourable thing, will then come into full play; and the man who feels that he was appointed to serve his country because he was deemed especially fitted to do so, will be likely to regard the service, and discharge its duties, very differently to one who knows that he was thus provided for" because his friends possessed certain means of influencing the minister.

But an objection which seems to excite a greater amount of alarm in the heads of offices is, that the proposed examination would, as Mr. Romilly states it, give "the great majority of appointments in the Civil Service to persons of a low social position in life;

and the more the service is recruited from the lower classes the less it will be sought after by the higher, until at last the aristocracy will be altogether dissociated from the permanent Civil Service of the country." Or, in other words, as he elsewhere puts it, "that the ultimate result of open competition will be a democratical Civil Service, side by side with an aristocratical legislature." We have no fear of any such ultimate result. The aristocratic candidates, we have little doubt, will hold their place in the foremost rank of any competitive examination. If they shrink from the trial, or if they refuse to let plebeian blood come between the wind and their nobility, on their own heads will be the consequence. A Civil Service will exist if even the aristocracy be dissociated from it, and its duties be perhaps none the worse performed. High birth gives no warrant for an efficient or faithful discharge of duty. The members of the Colonial Office, whose qualifications Sir James Stephen speaks of as "incredibly low," he at the same time describes as having, "with an occasional exception, all had the education, the manners, the feelings, and the characteristic principles of gentlemen." Or if, to borrow again from Mr. Mill, who has handled the objection with characteristic vigour, "if, as this objection supposes, the sons of gentlemen cannot be expected to have as much ability and instruction as the sons of low people, it would make a strong case for social changes of a more extensive character. If the sons of gentlemen would not, even under the stimulus of competition, maintain themselves on an equality of intellect and attainments with youths of a lower rank, how much more below the mark must they be with their present monopoly ; and to how much greater an extent than the friends of the measure allege, must the efficiency of the public service be at present sacrificed to their incompetency! And more: if with advantages and opportunities so vastly superior, the youth of the higher classes have not honour enough, or energy enough, or public spirit enough, to make themselves as well qualified as others for the station which they desire to maintain, they are not fit for that station, and they cannot too soon step out of it, and give place to better

D

people." But we believe this objection arises from a misconception, and that those who advanced it, did so from some vague dread that the "tone" of the service would be lowered, without perceiving to what strange lengths their argument would lead. In truth, as Mr. Chadwick has pointed out, at present the service is, as a whole, by no means aristocratic; "only two of the public offices are chiefly composed of aristocratical families, the actual majority of the other offices being otherwise composed. The larger and increasing proportion has been obtained for the constituencies of the smaller boroughs by persons of the lower condition,

and of education and qualifications greatly below the average of their own class." The proposed plan would be far more likely to raise than to lower the tone of the service, even if a little plebeian leaven found its way into the two favoured offices.

Another objection, which in the minds of some of the writers appears to grow out of the last, and one to which the present Chancellor of the Exchequer attaches so much importance that he gave it a prominent place, both in his written comments on the Report and in his speech in the House of Commons, is, that the proposed examination would not secure trustworthy men-and discretion and trustworthiness are among the first qualities required in the clerks of a public office-or test moral qualities. But to this again a reply lies on the surfaceneither does the present system. If the men are trustworthy-and all agree that they are-it is not in consequence either of the system of nomination or examination. The main security for this lies in the feeling of professional honour which is sure to actuate the great majority in any office, and is no more likely to be lost under one system than the other. The certainty of loss of place and reputation which would follow detection, is what must be chiefly trusted to in the case of the only persons likely to betray their trust. But if there be any difference under either system, the advantage lies with the new one, which, by the more strict and protracted probation which it proposes to enforce, would afford a certain opportunity of testing the trustworthiness of the probationer; and also of ascertaining more satisfactorily than by certificates his moral qualities.

"are

But again it is urged, a free literary competing examination, so far from providing "proper men for the public service," would introduce a class of men too scholastic and merely intellectual for the kind of work which junior clerks are for many years required to undertake. "The persons who in the great majority of cases would be the successful candidates," the Chancellor of the Exchequer tells us, schoolmasters, ushers, and persons employed in the practical business of education." It would hardly have occurred to us, unless Sir G. C. Lewis had suggested it, that more than a very small number of such persons would have been likely to offer themselves as candidates at all. But if they did, and their qualifications entitled them to election, we see no reason why their profession should operate against them. We admit, however, that there would be danger if the examination were merely literary. It is, of course, on the kind of examination that the success of the scheme will to a great extent depend; and it ought to be, as it seems to us, a principal object of