The Rule That Told Workingmen to Keep Out of Politics

THIS RULE OBNOXIOUS.

When the President first received his idea of discriminating against workingmen, it received but little attention until it was formulated in his letter to the commission soon after he became President. He, however, speaks of a similar letter issued by President Cleveland in 1886. The commission also has said: "President Cleveland in 1886 issued an order warning office holders against active participation in political movements." Undoubtedly this is a purely inadvertent mistake on the part of the commission, but we are going to show them where they are wrong, so that they will not make that mistake any more.

What President Cleveland did say was this: "Individual interest and activity in political affairs are by no means condemned." Does that sound like a warning "against active participation in political movements"?

This whole letter of Mr. Cleveland's is so fair and reasonable; it is such a clear exposition of the restrictions that good citizenship demands, without the sacrifice of any civic rights; it so accurately represents our own view of the proper scope of civil service regulations, that we commend it to the attention of all good citizens, both in and out of the service.

GROVER CLEVELAND'S POSITION.

Washington, July 11, 1886. To the Heads of Departments in the Service of the General Government:

I deem this a proper time to especially warn all subordinates in the several departments and all office holders under the general government against the use of their official position in attempts to control political movements in their localities.

Office holders are the agents of the people, not the masters. Not only is their time and labor due to the government, but they should scrupulously avoid in their political actions, as well as in the discharge of their official duty, offending by a display of obtrusive partisanship their neighbors who have relations with them as public officials.

They should also constantly remember that their party friends from whom they have received preferment have not invested them with the power of arbitrarily managing their political affairs. They have no right as office holders to dictate the political action of their party associates, or to throttle freedom of action within party lines.

The influence of federal office holders should not be felt in the manipulation of political primary meetings and nominating conventions. The use by these officials of their position to compass their selection as delegates to political conventions is indecent and unfair.

Individual interest and activity in political affairs are by no means condemned. Office holders are neither disfranchised nor forbidden the exercise of political privileges; but their privileges are not enlarged nor is their duty to party increased to pernicious activity by office holding. — GROVER CLEVELAND.

There are two things about this letter to which we want to call your attention. (1) Every word of it indicates that it was intended for those officials holding appointive offices by political favor — in other words, the unclassified service. Yet Mr. Roosevelt's commission says of this letter, "The order applied generally to all classes of officials, whether in the classified or unclassified service." Read the letter again and see who is right. (2) Even if the commission is right and this order was intended for us, there is in it no hint of restriction on political activity. It is a plea for clean politics. Judged by this letter, Grover Cleveland must have recognized the truth that it is the duty of every man to actively participate in politics; not merely to vote, but to try to educate and influence others to join in the effort to bring about a better society.

ROOSEVELT'S RULE.

Here is the amendment which Roosevelt slipped into section 1 of rule 1, trying to make it appear like a natural corollary of Cleveland's reasonable rule: "Persons who, by the provisions of these rules, are in the competitive classified service, while retaining the right to vote as they please, and to express privately their opinions on all political subjects, shall take no active part in political management or in political campaigns."

On its face this rule does not appear to be as vicious as it is. But even if it meant only what it seems to mean, it would be bad enough. Of course if a man wishes to exert any effective influence on the political opinions of others, he must take an active part in political campaigns. Why should citizens who stand for what is honest and good in government be forced to stand silent at the most important periods of our civic life, at the very times when the enemies of society are most active?

DISCRIMINATION THAT IS RANK.

These laborers and mechanics are brought within the rule by a double exception that is rank in its plain discrimination against workingmen and in favor of partisan politicians. The rule forbidding active participation in political management or campaigns makes an exception in the case of the unclassified service. Now the unclassified service consists in part of partisan office holders anxious to work for the administration, and in part of laborers and mechanics who might embarrass the administration by telling their grievances, if their mouths were not stopped. So Mr. Roosevelt made an exception of an exception, and put the workingmen under the rule.

The rule, as we have shown, is bad enough on its face, but that is nothing to the astonishing way in which it has been applied. It has been only those who ran for office, acted as political managers, or attracted attention by vigorous campaigning, who have fallen afoul of the rule. The penalty has been threatened or applied in cases of acting on an election committee, serving as an election judge, acting as a delegate to a political or local-option convention, editing a political paper, holding office. Yet members of the Machinists' Union have been discriminated against in this way, and their Central Labor Council issued an appeal to organized labor, which has apparently received but little attention.

The Commission regretted in their 24th report that the scope of the rule had not been definitely determined because few charges had been brought under it. They have made some progress since then, but its possibilities are not yet exhausted. No cases of nature faking or race suicide have as yet been indicated under this rule.