EDITORIAL 



501 



herents, or as bribes for future favors, and the fitness 

 of the appointee for the work was a secondary considera- 

 tion. Even in the National Government, certain depart- 

 ments and bureaus were notoriously dominated by these 

 standards, and the term "government ofificial" was a 

 synonym, in the popular mind, for laziness, incomiietency, 

 and even graft. 



Very slowly, but with increasing momentum, our great 

 and unwieldy democracy is coming to the realization and 

 acceptance of a new and better standard of public service. 

 This found its first feeble beginning in what was termed 

 "Civil Service Reform", which spught to establish stand- 

 ards of efficiency, and to substitute merit and continuous 

 tenure of ofifice for subordinates, in place of the spoils sys- 

 tem. 



Soon there grew up in certain departments of the Na- 

 tional Government standards of scientific attainment, 

 requiring educational training of a high order, and at- 

 tracting men to public work, not through the avenue oi 

 political preferment, but on the solid basis of a profes- 

 sional and business career. Engineers, both within and 

 without the United States Army, geologists and topog- 

 raphers, agricultural experts and foresters a great 

 army of trained men has grown up almost over night 

 in our National Service and now, when we suddenly 

 awake to our needs, it is these public servants of the 

 new type who have taken the leadership in organizing 

 not merely the army, but the food campaign and many 

 other vital activities. Joined with them are the special- 

 ists drafted from private business. 



The lesson which the National Government has so 

 nearly learned, in the substitution and protection of a 

 force of skilled men in place of the outgrown system of 

 political appointees, is beginning to make headway also 

 in state and municipal affairs. But here the powers of 

 politics the old, inefficient system of partisan govern- 

 ment is still strongly intrenched, and it will take much 

 study and effort to establish practical systems under 

 which the grip of the spoilsman can be shaken from the 

 throat of the public, and at the same time the govern- 

 ment of city or state be kept responsive to popular will. 



It is significant that in cities, the form of govern- 

 ment most successful to date is the commission plan, 

 under which a body of several citizens is chosen by bal- 

 lot, to serve as a governing board, with ]50wer to ap- 

 point all subordinates. A still greater improvement is 



the authorization of employment by them of a city man- 

 ager. This plan is identical with that followed by prac- 

 tically all large private business corporations univer- 

 sally adopted by them because it has been found to secure 

 the best results. Under its operation, experts are re- 

 tained to manage each special department of work, and 

 are paid adequate salaries. 



Rut, when we come to state organization, we find no 

 consistent policies developed as yet. The machinery is 

 too complicated for the public to grasp and solve at once. 

 The usual form of organization is the outgrowth of hap- 

 hazard development, and combines appointment by the 

 governor, for some positions, with the creation of boards 

 of directors for other lines of work. The executives, in 

 seeking light on this question, naturally gravitate towards 

 enlargements of their own powers, the abolition of nu- 

 merous boards, and the building up of centralized forms 

 of government largely autocratic in character, and thor- 

 oughly dominated by the principle of political control. 

 Can the various states find ways of solving this problem, 

 which shall secure in state affairs the same efficiency 

 and high standards of service that are now rapidly be- 

 coming established in National and Municipal Govern- 

 ment? 



If state forestry is taken as an example, the experi- 

 ence of numerous states is wholly in favor of the plan 

 of retaining boards of directors over distinct depart- 

 ments of state work. But these boards must recognize 

 that the executive work of the department must be 

 placed by them on the shoulders of a trained official. 

 It is the failure of boards to do this that has discredited 

 them in many instances. P'ortunately, forestry boards, 

 with few exceptions, have followed correct principles, 

 and the work of the trained men so selected speaks for 

 itself in every state so managed. So conspicuous is the 

 success of state foresters selected under this plan of 

 organization, and so great is the contrast in states in 

 which other plans have been followed, that in this time 

 of self-examination and sincere effort the states cannot 

 afford to overlook or neglect the lesson taught. Much 

 remains to be learned, but the principle of a board of 

 directors, i^roperly chosen, must not be cast upon the 

 scrap heap in favor of centralized control. Who knows 

 but that in the board idea properly developed we may not 

 have after all the solution of ihe ])roblem of harmonizing 

 ..popular liberty with highest efficiency in a democracy? 



OUR NATIONAL MEAT 



IN a recent issue, American Forestrv called attention 

 to the probable effect of the new 640-acre stock graz- 

 ing homestead law upon the grazing industry of the 

 West. This law was based upon a fundamental eco- 

 nomic error, in as.suming that 640 acres of non-irrigable 

 land was sufficient to support a family by its use for 

 grazing. It is universally known in the West, and as 

 freely admitted, that this cannot be done. The carrying 

 capacity of the arid range to which this law applies i^ 

 but one cow to from 20 to 40 acres. One hundred beef- 



SUPPLY THREATENED 



cattle yield only a fair living, yet this minimum requires 

 at least 2,000 acres and more often twice that area. 



The public officials charged with the administration 

 of this law are as fully aware of this situation as are the 

 local residents, but true to the ancient doctrine of laissez- 

 faire, they shrug their shoulders and express the opinion 

 that the success or failure of the homesteader is none of 

 their concern, provided they live up to legal requirements 

 in proving up. 



In a recent article published in the Albuquerque, N. M. 



