The Spoils System Must Go
In an 1880 letter of acceptance, a presidential candidate lays out a radical vision to dismantle political patronage and return to a government based on merit rather than party service.
More than forty years ago, a standard for taking appointments to office grew up based upon the maxim, 'To the victors belong the spoils.' This, the false rule—the bad rule—that honesty, capacity, and fidelity constitute the only real qualifications for office, and that there is no other, gave place to the idea that party services were to be chiefly considered. All parties in practice have adopted this system. It has not, however, been improved. The office in these cases have become not merely rewards for party services, but rewards for services to party leaders. This system destroys the independence of the separate departments of the government, and tends directly to extravagance and official incapacity. It is a temptation to dishonesty; it hinders and impairs that careful supervision and strict accountability by which alone faithful and efficient public service can be secured. The reform should be radical, thorough and complete. We should return to the principles and practice of the founders of the government. They neither expected nor desired from the public officer any partisan service; they meant that public officers should owe their whole service to the government and to the people; they meant that the officer should be secure in his tenure as long as his personal character remained untarnished and the performance of his duties satisfactory. If elected, I shall conduct the administration of the government on these principles, and all constitutional powers vested in the executive will be employed to establish this reform.
“The office in these cases have become not merely rewards for party services, but rewards for services to party leaders. This system destroys the independence of the separate departments of the government.”
This letter reflects the fierce 19th-century debate over the 'spoils system,' where government jobs were traded as political currency. While the modern civil service protects against such blatant patronage, the tension between political loyalty and professional expertise remains a recurring theme in American civic administration.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.