The Study of Administration

Woodrow Wilson
November 1, 1886
An Essay
I suppose that no practical science is ever studied where there is no need to know it.
The very act, thereore, that the eminently practical science o administration is
indin! its way into colle!e courses in this country would prove that this country
needs to know more about administration, were such proo o the act re"uired to
make out a case. It need not be said, however, that we do not look into colle!e
pro!rammes or proo o this act. It is a thin! almost taken or !ranted amon! us,
that the present movement called civil service reorm must, ater the
accomplishment o its irst purpose, e#pand into eorts to improve, not the
personnel only, but also the or!ani$ation and methods o our !overnment oices%
because it is plain that their or!ani$ations and methods need improvement only less
than their personnel. It is the ob&ect o administrative study to discover, irst, what
!overnment can properly and successully do, and, secondly, how it can do these
proper thin!s with the utmost possible eiciency and at the least possible cost either
o money or o ener!y. 'n both these points there is obviously much need o li!ht
amon! us( and only careul study can supply that li!ht.
)eore enterin! on that study, however, it is needul%
I. To take some account o what others have done in the same line( that is to say, o
the history o the study.
II. To ascertain &ust what is its sub&ect*matter.
III. To determine &ust what are the best methods by which to develop it, and the
most clariyin! political conceptions to carry with us into it.
+nless we know and settle these thin!s, we shall set out without chart or compass.
I.
The science o administration is the latest ruit o that study o the science o politics
which was be!un some twenty*two hundred years a!o. It is a birth o our own
century, almost o our own !eneration.
,hy was it so late in comin!- ,hy did it wait till this too busy century o ours to
demand attention or itsel- Administration is the most obvious part o !overnment(
it is !overnment in action( it is the e#ecutive, the operative, the most visible side o
!overnment, and is o course as old as !overnment itsel. It is !overnment in action,
and one mi!ht very naturally e#pect to ind that !overnment in action had arrested
the attention and provoked the scrutiny o writers o politics very early in the history
o systematic thou!ht.
)ut such was not the case. No one wrote systematically o administration as a
branch o the science o !overnment until the present century had passed its irst
youth and had be!un to put orth its characteristic lower o the systematic
knowled!e. +p to our own day all the political writers whom we now read had
thou!ht, ar!ued, do!mati$ed only about the constitution o !overnment( about the
nature o the state, the essence and seat o soverei!nty, popular power and kin!ly
prero!ative( about the !reatest meanin!s lyin! at the heart o !overnment, and the
hi!h ends set beore the purpose o !overnment by man.s nature and man.s aims.
The central ield o controversy was that !reat ield o theory in which monarchy rode
tilt a!ainst democracy, in which oli!archy would have built or itsel stron!holds o
privile!e, and in which tyranny sou!ht opportunity to make !ood its claim to receive
submission rom all competitors. Amidst this hi!h warare o principles,
administration could command no pause or its own consideration. The "uestion was
always% ,ho shall make law, and what shall that law be- The other "uestion, how
law should be administered with enli!htenment, with e"uity, with speed, and without
riction, was put aside as /practical detail/ which clerks could arran!e ater doctors
had a!reed upon principles.
That political philosophy took this direction was o course no accident, no chance
preerence or perverse whim o political philosophers. The philosophy o any time is,
as 0e!el says, /nothin! but the spirit o that time e#pressed in abstract thou!ht/(
and political philosophy, like philosophy o every other kind, has only held up the
mirror to contemporary aairs. The trouble in early times was almost alto!ether
about the constitution o !overnment( and conse"uently that was what en!rossed
men.s thou!hts. There was little or no trouble about administration,*at least little
that was heeded by administrators. The unctions o !overnment were simple,
because lie itsel was simple. 1overnment went about imperatively and compelled
men, without thou!ht o consultin! their wishes. There was no comple# system o
public revenues and public debts to pu$$le inanciers( there were, conse"uently, no
inanciers to be pu$$led. No one who possessed power was lon! at a loss how to use
it. The !reat and only "uestion was% ,ho shall possess it- 2opulations were o
mana!eable numbers( property was o simple sorts. There were plenty o arms, but
no stocks and bonds% more cattle than vested interests.
I have said that all this was true o /early times/( but it was substantially true also o
comparatively late times. 'ne does not have to look back o the last century or the
be!innin!s o the present comple#ities o trade and perple#ities o commercial
speculation, nor or the portentous birth o national debts. 1ood 3ueen )ess,
doubtless, thou!ht that the monopolies o the si#teenth century were hard enou!h to
handle without burnin! her hands( but they are not remembered in the presence o
the !iant monopolies o the nineteenth century. ,hen )lackstone lamented that
corporations had no bodies to be kicked and no souls to be damned, he was
anticipatin! the proper time or such re!rets by a ull century. The perennial discords
between master and workmen which now so oten disturb industrial society be!an
beore the )lack 4eath and the 5tatute o 6aborers( but never beore our own day
did they assume such ominous proportions as they wear now. In brie, i diiculties
o !overnmental action are to be seen !atherin! in other centuries, they are to be
seen culminatin! in our own.
This is the reason why administrative tasks have nowadays to be so studiously and
systematically ad&usted to careully tested standards o policy, the reason why we
are havin! now what we never had beore, a science o administration. The wei!htier
debates o constitutional principle are even yet by no means concluded( but they are
no lon!er o more immediate practical moment than "uestions o administration. It is
!ettin! to be harder to run a constitution than to rame one.
0ere is 7r. )a!ehot.s !raphic, whimsical way o depictin! the dierence between the
old and the new in administration%
In early times, when a despot wishes to !overn a distant province, he sends down a
satrap on a !rand horse, and other people on little horses( and very little is heard o
the satrap a!ain unless he send back some o the little people to tell what he has
been doin!. No !reat labour o superintendence is possible. 8ommon rumour and
casual report are the sources o intelli!ence. I it seems certain that the province is
in a bad state, satrap No. I is recalled, and satrap No. 9 sent out in his stead. In
civili$ed countries the process is dierent. :ou erect a bureau in the province you
want to !overn( you make it write letters and copy letters( it sends home ei!ht
reports per diem to the head bureau in 5t. 2etersbur!. Nobody does a sum in the
province without some one doin! the same sum in the capital, to /check/ him, and
see that he does it correctly. The conse"uence o this is, to throw on the heads o
departments an amount o readin! and labour which can only be accomplished by
the !reatest natural aptitude, the most eicient trainin!, the most irm and re!ular
industry.
;Essay on 5ir ,illiam 2itt. <All ootnotes ,,.s.=>
There is scarcely a sin!le duty o !overnment which was once simple which is not
now comple#( !overnment once had but a ew masters( it now has scores o
masters. 7a&orities ormerly only underwent !overnment( they now conduct
!overnment. ,here !overnment once mi!ht ollow the whims o a court, it must now
ollow the views o a nation.
And those views are steadily widenin! to new conceptions o state duty( so that, at
the same time that the unctions o !overnment are everyday becomin! more
comple# and diicult, they are also vastly multiplyin! in number. Administration is
everywhere puttin! its hands to new undertakin!s. The utility, cheapness, and
success o the !overnment.s postal service, or instance, point towards the early
establishment o !overnmental control o the tele!raph system. 'r, even i our
!overnment is not to ollow the lead o the !overnments o Europe in buyin! or
buildin! both tele!raph and railroad lines, no one can doubt that in some way it must
make itsel master o masterul corporations. The creation o national commissioners
o railroads, in addition to the older state commissions, involves a very important
and delicate e#tension o administrative unctions. ,hatever hold o authority state
or ederal !overnments are to take upon corporations, there must ollow cares and
responsibilities which will re"uire not a little wisdom, knowled!e, and e#perience.
5uch thin!s must be studied in order to be well done. And these, as I have said, are
only a ew o the doors which are bein! opened to oices o !overnment. The idea o
the state and the conse"uent ideal o its duty are under!oin! noteworthy chan!e(
and /the idea o the state is the conscience o administration./ 5eein! every day new
thin!s which the state ou!ht to do, the ne#t thin! is to see clearly how it ou!ht to do
them.
This is why there should be a science o administration which shall seek to strai!hten
the paths o !overnment, to make its business less unbusinesslike, to stren!then and
puriy its or!ani$ation, and to crown its duties with dutiulness. This is one reason
why there is such a science.
)ut where has this science !rown up- 5urely not on this side the sea. Not much
impartial scientiic method is to be discerned in our administrative practices. The
poisonous atmosphere o city !overnment, the crooked secrets o state
administration, the conusion, sinecurism, and corruption ever and a!ain discovered
in the bureau# at ,ashin!ton orbid us to believe that any clear conceptions o what
constitutes !ood administration are as yet very widely current in the +nited 5tates.
No( American writers have hitherto taken no very important part in the advancement
o this science. It has ound its doctors in Europe. It is not o our makin!( it is a
orei!n science, speakin! very little o the lan!ua!e o En!lish or American principle.
It employs only orei!n ton!ues( it utters none but what are to our minds alien ideas.
Its aims, its e#amples, its conditions, are almost e#clusively !rounded in the
histories o orei!n races, in the precedents o orei!n systems, in the lessons o
orei!n revolutions. It has been developed by ?rench and 1erman proessors, and is
conse"uently in all parts adapted to the needs o a compact state, and made to it
hi!hly centrali$ed orms o !overnment( whereas, to answer our purposes, it must
be adapted, not to a simple and compact, but to a comple# and multiorm state, and
made to it hi!hly decentrali$ed orms o !overnment. I we would employ it, we
must Americani$e it, and that not ormally, in lan!ua!e merely, but radically, in
thou!ht, principle, and aim as well. It must learn our constitutions by heart( must
!et the bureaucratic ever out o its veins( must inhale much ree American air.
I an e#planation be sou!ht why a science maniestly so susceptible o bein! made
useul to all !overnments alike should have received attention irst in Europe, where
!overnment has lon! been a monopoly, rather than in En!land or the +nited 5tates,
where !overnment has lon! been a common ranchise, the reason will doubtless be
ound to be twoold% irst, that in Europe, &ust because !overnment was independent
o popular assent, there was more !overnin! to be done( and, second, that the
desire to keep !overnment a monopoly made the monopolists interested in
discoverin! the least irritatin! means o !overnin!. They were, besides, ew enou!h
to adopt means promptly.
It will be instructive to look into this matter a little more closely. In speakin! o
European !overnments I do not, o course, include En!land. 5he has not reused to
chan!e with the times. 5he has simply tempered the severity o the transition rom a
polity o aristocratic privile!e to a system o democratic power by slow measures o
constitutional reorm which, without preventin! revolution, has conined it to paths o
peace. )ut the countries o the continent or a lon! time desperately stru!!led
a!ainst all chan!e, and would have diverted revolution by sotenin! the asperities o
absolute !overnment. They sou!ht so to perect their machinery as to destroy all
wearin! riction, so to sweeten their methods with consideration or the interests o
the !overned as to placate all hinderin! hatred, and so assiduously and opportunely
to oer their aid to all classes o undertakin!s as to render themselves indispensable
to the industrious. They did at last !ive the people constitutions and the ranchise(
but even ater that they obtained leave to continue despotic by becomin! paternal.
They made themselves too eicient to be dispensed with, too smoothly operative to
be noticed, too enli!htened to be inconsiderately "uestioned, too benevolent to be
suspected, too powerul to be coped with. All this has re"uired study( and they have
closely studied it.
'n this side the sea we, the while, had known no !reat diiculties o !overnment.
,ith a new country in which there was room and remunerative employment or
everybody, with liberal principles o !overnment and unlimited skill in practical
politics, we were lon! e#empted rom the need o bein! an#iously careul about plans
and methods o administration. ,e have naturally been slow to see the use or
si!niicance o those many volumes o learned research and painstakin! e#amination
into the ways and means o conductin! !overnment which the presses o Europe
have been sendin! to our libraries. 6ike a lusty child, !overnment with us has
e#panded in nature and !rown !reat in stature, but has also become awkward in
movement. The vi!or and increase o its lie has been alto!ether out o proportion to
its skill in livin!. It has !ained stren!th, but it has not ac"uired deportment. 1reat,
thereore, as has been our advanta!e over the countries o Europe in point o ease
and health o constitutional development, now that the time or more careul
administrative ad&ustments and lar!er administrative knowled!e has come to us, we
are at a si!nal disadvanta!e as compared with the transatlantic nations( and this or
reasons which I shall try to make clear.
@ud!in! by the constitutional histories o the chie nations o the modern world, there
may be said to be three periods o !rowth throu!h which !overnment has passed in
all the most hi!hly developed o e#istin! systems, and throu!h which it promises to
pass in all the rest. The irst o these periods is that o absolute rulers, and o an
administrative system adapted to absolute rule( the second is that in which
constitutions are ramed to do away with absolute rulers and substitute popular
control, and in which administration is ne!lected or these hi!her concerns( and the
third is that in which the soverei!n people undertake to develop administration under
this new constitution which has brou!ht them into power.
Those !overnments are now in the lead in administrative practice which had rulers
still absolute but also enli!htened when those modern days o political illumination
came in which it was made evident to all but the blind that !overnors are properly
only the servants o the !overned. In such !overnments administration has been
or!ani$ed to subserve the !eneral weal with the simplicity and eectiveness
vouchsaed only to the undertakin!s o a sin!le will.
5uch was the case in 2russia, or instance, where administration has been most
studied and most nearly perected. ?rederic the 1reat, stern and masterul as was
his rule, still sincerely proessed to re!ard himsel as only the chie servant o the
state, to consider his !reat oice a public trust( and it was he who, buildin! upon the
oundations laid by his ather, be!an to or!ani$e the public service o 2russia as in
very earnest a service o the public. 0is no less absolute successor, ?rederic ,illiam
III, under the inspiration o 5tein, a!ain, in his turn, advanced the work still urther,
plannin! many o the broader structural eatures which !ive irmness and orm to
2russian administration to*day. Almost the whole o the admirable system has been
developed by kin!ly initiative.
' similar ori!in was the practice, i not the plan, o modern ?rench administration,
with its symmetrical divisions o territory and its orderly !radations o oice. The
days o the Aevolution o the 8onstituent Assembly were days o constitution*writing,
but they can hardly be called days o constitution*making. The revolution heralded a
period o constitutional development,*the entrance o ?rance upon the second o
those periods which I have enumerated,*but it did not itsel inau!urate such a
period. It interrupted and unsettled absolutism, but it did not destroy it. Napoleon
succeeded the monarchs o ?rance, to e#ercise a power as unrestricted as they had
ever possessed.
The recastin! o ?rench administration by Napoleon is, thereore, my second
e#ample o the perectin! o civil machinery by the sin!le will o an absolute ruler
beore the dawn o a constitutional era. No corporate, popular will could ever have
eected arran!ements such as those which Napoleon commanded. Arran!ements so
simple at the e#pense o local pre&udice, so lo!ical in their indierence to popular
choice, mi!ht be decreed by a 8onstituent Assembly, but could be established only
by the unlimited authority o a despot. The system o the year BIII was ruthlessly
thorou!h and heartlessly perect. It was, besides, in lar!e part, a return to the
despotism that had been overthrown.
Amon! those nations, on the other hand, which entered upon a season o
constitution*makin! and popular reorm beore administration had received the
impress o liberal principle, administrative improvement has been tardy and hal*
done. 'nce a nation has embarked in the business o manuacturin! constitutions, it
inds it e#ceedin!ly diicult to close out that business and open or the public a
bureau o skilled, economical administration. There seems to be no end to the
tinkerin! o constitutions. :our ordinary constitution will last you hardly ten years
without repairs or additions( and the time or administrative detail comes late.
0ere, o course, our e#amples are En!land and our own country. In the days o the
An!evin kin!s, beore constitutional lie had taken root in the 1reat 8harter, le!al
and administrative reorms be!an to proceed with sense and vi!or under the impulse
o 0enry II.s shrewd, busy, pushin!, indomitable spirit and purpose( and kin!ly
initiative seemed destined in En!land, as elsewhere, to shape !overnmental !rowth
at its will. )ut impulsive, errant Aichard and weak, despicable @ohn were not the men
to carry out such schemes as their ather.s. Administrative development !ave place
in their rei!ns to constitutional stru!!les( and 2arliament became kin! beore any
En!lish monarch had had the practical !enius or the enli!htened conscience to devise
&ust and lastin! orms or the civil service o the state.
The En!lish race, conse"uently, has lon! and successully studied the art o curbin!
e#ecutive power to the constant ne!lect o the art o perectin! e#ecutive methods.
It has e#ercised itsel much more in controllin! than in ener!i$in! !overnment. It has
been more concerned to render !overnment &ust and moderate than to make it
acile, well*ordered, and eective. En!lish and American political history has been a
history, not o administrative development, but o le!islative oversi!ht,*not o
pro!ress in !overnmental or!ani$ation, but o advance in law*makin! and political
criticism. 8onse"uently, we have reached a time when administrative study and
creation are imperatively necessary to the well*bein! o our !overnments saddled
with the habits o a lon! period o constitution*makin!. That period has practically
closed, so ar as the establishment o essential principles is concerned, but we
cannot shake o its atmosphere. ,e !o on critici$in! when we ou!ht to be creatin!.
,e have reached the third o the periods I have mentioned,*the period, namely,
when the people have to develop administration in accordance with the constitutions
they won or themselves in a previous period o stru!!le with absolute power( but we
are not prepared or the tasks o the new period.
5uch an e#planation seems to aord the only escape rom blank astonishment at the
act that, in spite o our vast advanta!es in point o political liberty, and above all in
point o practical political skill and sa!acity, so many nations are ahead o us in
administrative or!ani$ation and administrative skill. ,hy, or instance, have we but
&ust be!un puriyin! a civil service which was rotten ull ity years a!o- To say that
slavery diverted us is but to repeat what I have said*that laws in our constitution
delayed us.
' course all reasonable preerence would declare or this En!lish and American
course o politics rather than or that o any European country. ,e should not like to
have had 2russia.s history or the sake o havin! 2russia.s administrative skill( and
2russia.s particular system o administration would "uite suocate us. It is better to
be untrained and ree than to be servile and systematic. 5till there is no denyin! that
it would be better yet to be both ree in spirit and proicient in practice. It is this
even more reasonable preerence which impels us to discover what there may be to
hinder or delay us in naturali$in! this much*to*be*desired science o administration.
,hat, then, is there to prevent-
,ell, principally, popular soverei!nty. It is harder or democracy to or!ani$e
administration than or monarchy. The very completeness o our most cherished
political successes in the past embarrasses us. ,e have enthroned public opinion(
and it is orbidden us to hope durin! its rei!n or any "uick schoolin! o the
soverei!n in e#ecutive e#pertness or in the conditions o perect unctional balance in
!overnment. The very act that we have reali$ed popular rule in its ullness has made
the task o organizaing that rule &ust so much the more diicult. In order to make
any advance at all we must instruct and persuade a multitudinous monarch called
public opinion,*a much less easible undertakin! than to inluence a sin!le monarch
called a kin!. An individual soverei!n will adopt a simple plan and carry it out
directly% he will have but one opinion, and he will embody that one opinion in one
command. )ut this other soverei!n, the people, will have a score o dierin!
opinions. They can a!ree upon nothin! simple% advance must be made throu!h
compromise, by a compoundin! o dierences, by a trimmin! o plans and a
suppression o too strai!htorward principles. There will be a succession o resolves
runnin! throu!h a course o years, a droppin! ire o commands runnin! throu!h the
whole !amut o modiications.
In !overnment, as in virtue, the hardest o thin!s is to make pro!ress. ?ormerly the
reason or this was that the sin!le person who was soverei!n was !enerally either
selish, i!norant, timid, or a ool,*albeit there was now and a!ain one who was wise.
Nowadays the reason is that the many, the people, who are soverei!n have no sin!le
ear which one can approach, and are selish, i!norant, timid, stubborn, or oolish
with the selishness, the i!norances, the stubbornnesses, the timidities, or the ollies
o several thousand persons,*albeit there are hundreds who are wise. 'nce the
advanta!e o the reormer was that the soverei!n.s mind had a deinite locality, that
it was contained in one man.s head, and that conse"uently it could be !otten at(
thou!h it was his disadvanta!e that the mind learned only reluctantly or only in small
"uantities, or was under the inluence o some one who let it learn only the wron!
thin!s. Now, on the contrary, the reormer is bewildered by the act that the
soverei!n.s mind has no deinite locality, but is contained in a votin! ma&ority o
several million heads( and embarrassed by the act that the mind o this soverei!n
also is under the inluence o avorites, who are none the less avorites in a !ood old*
ashioned sense o the word because they are not persons by preconceived opinions(
i.e., pre&udices which are not to be reasoned with because they are not the children
o reason.
,herever re!ard or public opinion is a irst principle o !overnment, practical reorm
must be slow and all reorm must be ull o compromises. ?or wherever public
opinion e#ists it must rule. This is now an a#iom hal the world over, and will
presently come to be believed even in Aussia. ,hoever would eect a chan!e in a
modern constitutional !overnment must irst educate his ellow*citi$ens to want
some chan!e. That done, he must persuade them to want the particular chan!e he
wants. 0e must irst make public opinion willin! to listen and then see to it that it
listen to the ri!ht thin!s. 0e must stir it up to search or an opinion, and then
mana!e to put the ri!ht opinion in its way.
The irst step is not less diicult than the second. ,ith opinions, possession is more
than nine points o the law. It is ne#t to impossible to dislod!e them. Institutions
which one !eneration re!ards as only a makeshit appro#imation to the reali$ation o
a principle, the ne#t !eneration honors as the nearest possible appro#imation to that
principle, and the ne#t worships the principle itsel. It takes scarcely three
!enerations or the apotheosis. The !randson accepts his !randather.s hesitatin!
e#periment as an inte!ral part o the i#ed constitution o nature.
Even i we had clear insi!ht into all the political past, and could orm out o perectly
instructed heads a ew steady, inallible, placidly wise ma#ims o !overnment into
which all sound political doctrine would be ultimately resolvable, would the country
act on them? That is the "uestion. The bulk o mankind is ri!idly unphilosophical, and
nowadays the bulk o mankind votes. A truth must become not only plain but also
commonplace beore it will be seen by the people who !o to their work very early in
the mornin!( and not to act upon it must involve !reat and pinchin! inconveniences
beore these same people will make up their minds to act upon it.
And where is this unphilosophical bulk o mankind more multiarious in its
composition than in the +nited 5tates- To know the public mind o this country, one
must know the mind, not o Americans o the older stocks only, but also o Irishmen,
o 1ermans, o ne!roes. In order to !et a ootin! or new doctrine, one must
inluence minds cast in every mould o race, minds inheritin! every bias o
environment, warped by the histories o a score o dierent nations, warmed or
chilled, closed or e#panded by almost every climate o the !lobe.
5o much, then, or the history o the study o administration, and the peculiarly
diicult conditions under which, enterin! upon it when we do, we must undertake it.
,hat, now, is the sub&ect*matter o this study, and what are its characteristic
ob&ects-
II.
The ield o administration is a ield o business. It is removed rom the hurry and
strie o politics( it at most points stands apart even rom the debatable !round o
constitutional study. It is a part o political lie only as the methods o the countin!
house are a part o the lie o society( only as machinery is part o the manuactured
product. )ut it is, at the same time, raised very ar above the dull level o mere
technical detail by the act that throu!h its !reater principles it is directly connected
with the lastin! ma#ims o political wisdom, the permanent truths o political
pro!ress.
The ob&ect o administrative study is to rescue e#ecutive methods rom the conusion
and costliness o empirical e#periment and set them upon oundations laid deep in
stable principle.
It is or this reason that we must re!ard civil*service reorm in its present sta!es as
but a prelude to a uller administrative reorm. ,e are now rectiyin! methods o
appointment( we must !o on to ad&ust e#ecutive unctions more itly and to prescribe
better methods o e#ecutive or!ani$ation and action. 8ivil*service reorm is thus but
a moral preparation or what is to ollow. It is clearin! the moral atmosphere o
oicial lie by establishin! the sanctity o public oice as a public trust, and, by
makin! service unpartisan, it is openin! the way or makin! it businesslike. )y
sweetenin! its motives it is renderin! it capable o improvin! its methods o work.
6et me e#pand a little what I have said o the province o administration. 7ost
important to be observed is the truth already so much and so ortunately insisted
upon by our civil*service reormers( namely, that administration lies outside the
proper sphere o politics. Administrative "uestions are not political "uestions.
Althou!h politics sets the tasks or administration, it should not be suered to
manipulate its oices.
This is distinction o hi!h authority( eminent 1erman writers insist upon it as o
course. )luntschli, or instance, bids us separate administration alike rom politics
and rom law. 2olitics, he says, is state activity /in thin!s !reat and universal/, while
/administration, on the other hand,/ is /the activity o the state in individual and
small thin!s. 2olitics is thus the special province o the statesman, administration o
the technical oicial./ /2olicy does nothin! without the aid o administration/( but
administration is not thereore politics. )ut we do not re"uire 1erman authority or
this position( this discrimination between administration and politics is now, happily,
too obvious to need urther discussion.
There is another distinction which must be worked into all our conclusions, which,
thou!h but another side o that between administration and politics, is not "uite so
easy to keep si!ht o% I mean the distinction between constitutional and
administrative "uestions, between those !overnmental ad&ustments which are
essential to constitutional principle and those which are merely instrumental to the
possibly chan!in! purposes o a wisely adaptin! convenience.
'ne cannot easily make clear to every one &ust where administration resides in the
various departments o any practicable !overnment without enterin! upon
particulars so numerous as to conuse and distinctions so minute as to distract. No
lines o demarcation, settin! apart administrative rom non*administrative unctions,
can be run between this and that department o !overnment without bein! run up
hill and down dale, over di$$y hei!hts o distinction and throu!h dense &un!les o
statutory enactment, hither and thither around /is/ and /buts,/ /whens/ and
/howevers,/ until they become alto!ether lost to the common eye not accustomed to
this sort o surveyin!, and conse"uently not ac"uainted with the use o the
theodolite o lo!ical discernment. A !reat deal o administration !oes about incognito
to most o the world, bein! conounded now with political /mana!ement,/ and a!ain
with constitutional principle.
2erhaps this ease o conusion may e#plain such utterances as that o Niebuhr.s%
/6iberty,/ he says, /depends incomparably more upon administration than upon
constitution./ At irst si!ht this appears to be lar!ely true. Apparently acility in the
actual e#ercise o liberty does depend more upon administrative arran!ements than
upon constitutional !uarantees( althou!h constitutional !uarantees alone secure the
e#istence o liberty. )ut*upon second thou!ht*is even so much as this true- 6iberty
no more consists in easy unctional movement than intelli!ence consists in the ease
and vi!or with which the limbs o a stron! man move. The principles that rule within
the man, or the constitution, are the vital sprin!s o liberty or servitude. )ecause
independence and sub&ection are without chains, are li!htened by every easy*
workin! device o considerate, paternal !overnment, they are not thereby
transormed into liberty. 6iberty cannot live apart rom constitutional principle( and
no administration, however perect and liberal its methods, can !ive men more than
a poor countereit o liberty i it rest upon illiberal principles o !overnment.
A clear view o the dierence between the province o constitutional law and the
province o administrative unction ou!ht to leave no room or misconception( and it
is possible to name some rou!hly deinite criteria upon which such a view can be
built. 2ublic administration is detailed and systematic e#ecution o public law. Every
particular application o !eneral law is an act o administration. The assessment and
raisin! o ta#es, or instance, the han!in! o a criminal, the transportation and
delivery o the mails, the e"uipment and recruitin! o the army and navy, etc., are
all obviously acts o administration( but the !eneral laws which direct these thin!s to
be done are as obviously outside o and above administration. The broad plans o
!overnmental action are not administrative( the detailed e#ecution o such plans is
administrative. 8onstitutions, thereore, properly concern themselves only with those
instrumentalities o !overnment which are to control !eneral law. 'ur ederal
constitution observes this principle in sayin! nothin! o even the !reatest o the
purely e#ecutive oices, and speakin! only o that 2resident o the +nion who was to
share the le!islative and policy*makin! unctions o !overnment, only o those
&ud!es o hi!hest &urisdiction who were to interpret and !uard its principles, and not
o those who were merely to !ive utterance to them.
This is not "uite the distinction between ,ill and answerin! 4eed, because the
administrator should have and does have a will o his own in the choice o means or
accomplishin! his work. 0e is not and ou!ht not to be a mere passive instrument.
The distinction is between !eneral plans and special means.
There is, indeed, one point at which administrative studies trench on constitutional
!round*or at least upon what seems constitutional !round. The study o
administration, philosophically viewed, is closely connected with the study o the
proper distribution o constitutional authority. To be eicient it must discover the
simplest arran!ements by which responsibility can be unmistakably i#ed upon
oicials( the best way o dividin! authority without hamperin! it, and responsibility
without obscurin! it. And this "uestion o the distribution o authority, when taken
into the sphere o the hi!her, the ori!inatin! unctions o !overnment, it is obviously
a central constitutional "uestion. I administrative study can discover the best
principles upon which to base such distribution, it will have done constitutional study
an invaluable service. 7ontes"uieu did not, I am convinced, say the last word on this
head.
To discover the best principle or the distribution o authority is o !reater
importance, possibly, under a democratic system, where oicials serve many
masters, than under others where they serve but a ew. All soverei!ns are suspicious
o their servants, and the soverei!n people is no e#ception to the rule( but how is its
suspicion to be allayed by knowledge- I that suspicion could but be clariied into
wise vi!ilance, it would be alto!ether salutary( i that vi!ilance could be aided by the
unmistakable placin! o responsibility, it would be alto!ether beneicent. 5uspicion in
itsel is never healthul either in the private or in the public mind. Trust is strength in
all relations o lie( and, as it is the oice o the constitutional reormer to create
conditions o trustulness, so it is the oice o the administrative or!ani$er to it
administration with conditions o clear*cut responsibility which shall insure
trustworthiness.
And let me say that lar!e powers and unhampered discretion seem to me the
indispensable conditions o responsibility. 2ublic attention must be easily directed, in
each case o !ood or bad administration, to &ust the man deservin! o praise or
blame. There is no dan!er in power, i only it be not irresponsible. I it be divided,
dealt out in shares to many, it is obscured( and i it be obscured, it is made
irresponsible. )ut i it be centered in heads o the service and in heads o branches o
the service, it is easily watched and brou!ht to book. I to keep his oice a man
must achieve open and honest success, and i at the same time he eels himsel
entrusted with lar!e reedom o discretion, the !reater his power the less likely is he
to abuse it, the more is he nerved and sobered and elevated by it. The less his
power, the more saely obscure and unnoticed does he eel his position to be, and
the more readily does he relapse into remissness.
@ust here we maniestly emer!e upon the ield o that still lar!er "uestion,*the proper
relations between public opinion and administration.
To whom is oicial trustworthiness to be disclosed, and by whom is it to be
rewarded- Is the oicial to look to the public or his meed o praise and his push o
promotion, or only to his superior in oice- Are the people to be called in to settle
administrative discipline as they are called in to settle constitutional principles- These
"uestions evidently ind their root in what is undoubtedly the undamental problem
o this whole study. That problem is% ,hat part shall public opinion take in the
conduct o administration-
The ri!ht answer seems to be, that public opinion shall play the part o authoritative
critic.
)ut the method by which its authority shall be made to tell- 'ur peculiar American
diiculty in or!ani$in! administration is not the dan!er o losin! liberty, but the
dan!er o not bein! able or willin! to separate its essentials rom its accidents. 'ur
success is made doubtul by that besettin! error o ours, the error o tryin! to do too
much by vote. 5el*!overnment does not consist in havin! a hand in everythin!, any
more than housekeepin! consists necessarily in cookin! dinner with one.s own
hands. The cook must be trusted with a lar!e discretion as to the mana!ement o the
ires and the ovens.
In those countries in which public opinion has yet to be instructed in its privile!es,
yet to be accustomed to havin! its own way, this "uestion as to the province o
public opinion is much more ready soluble than in this country, where public opinion
is wide awake and "uite intent upon havin! its own way anyhow. It is pathetic to see
a whole book written by a 1erman proessor o political science or the purpose o
sayin! to his countrymen, /2lease try to have an opinion about national aairs/( but
a public which is so modest may at least be e#pected to be very docile and
ac"uiescent in learnin! what thin!s it has not a ri!ht to think and speak about
imperatively. It may be slu!!ish, but it will not be meddlesome. It will submit to be
instructed beore it tries to instruct. Its political education will come beore its
political activity. In tryin! to instruct our own public opinion, we are dealin! with a
pupil apt to think itsel "uite suiciently instructed beorehand.
The problem is to make public opinion eicient without suerin! it to be
meddlesome. 4irectly e#ercised, in the oversi!ht o the daily details and in the
choice o the daily means o !overnment, public criticism is o course a clumsy
nuisance, a rustic handlin! delicate machinery. )ut as superintendin! the !reater
orces o ormative policy alike in politics and administration, public criticism is
alto!ether sae and beneicent, alto!ether indispensable. 6et administrative study
ind the best means or !ivin! public criticism this control and or shuttin! it out rom
all other intererence.
)ut is the whole duty o administrative study done when it has tau!ht the people
what sort o administration to desire and demand, and how to !et what they
demand- 'u!ht it not to !o on to drill candidates or the public service-
There is an admirable movement towards universal political education now aoot in
this country. The time will soon come when no colle!e o respectability can aord to
do without a well*illed chair o political science. )ut the education thus imparted will
!o but a certain len!th. It will multiply the number o intelli!ent critics o
!overnment, but it will create no component body o administrators. It will prepare
the way or the development o a sure*ooted understandin! o the !eneral principles
o !overnment, but it will not necessarily oster skill in conductin! !overnment. It is
an education which will e"uip le!islators, perhaps, but not e#ecutive oicials. I we
are to improve public opinion, which is the motive power o !overnment, we must
prepare better oicials as the apparatus o !overnment. I we are to put in new
boilers and to mend the ires which drive our !overnmental machinery, we must not
leave the old wheels and &oints and valves and bands to creak and bu$$ and clatter
on as best they may at biddin! o the new orce. ,e must put in new runnin! parts
wherever there is the least lack o stren!th or ad&ustment. It will be necessary to
or!ani$e democracy by sendin! up to the competitive e#aminations or the civil
service men deinitely prepared or standin! liberal tests as to technical knowled!e.
A technically schooled civil service will presently have become indispensable.
I know that a corps o civil servants prepared by a special schoolin! and drilled, ater
appointment, into a perected or!ani$ation, with appropriate hierarchy and
characteristic discipline, seems to a !reat many very thou!htul persons to contain
elements which mi!ht combine to make an oensive oicial class,* a distinct, semi*
corporate body with sympathies divorced rom those o a pro!ressive, ree*spirited
people, and with hearts narrowed to the meanness o a bi!oted oicialism. 8ertainly
such a class would be alto!ether hateul and harmul in the +nited 5tates. Any
measure calculated to produce it would or us be measures o reaction and o olly.
)ut to ear the creation o a domineerin!, illiberal oicialism as a result o the studies
I am here proposin! is to miss alto!ether the principle upon which I wish most to
insist. That principle is, that administration in the +nited 5tates must be at all points
sensitive to public opinion. A body o thorou!hly trained oicials servin! durin! !ood
behavior we must have in any case% that is a plain business necessity. )ut the
apprehension that such a body will be anythin! un*American clears away the
moment it is asked. ,hat is to constitute !ood behavior- ?or that "uestion obviously
carries its own answer on its ace. 5teady, hearty alle!iance to the policy o the
!overnment they serve will constitute !ood behavior. That policy will have no taint o
oicialism about it. It will not be the creation o permanent oicials, but o statesmen
whose responsibility to public opinion will be direct and inevitable. )ureaucracy can
e#ist only where the whole service o the state is removed rom the common political
lie o the people, its chies as well as its rank and ile. Its motives, its ob&ects, its
policy, its standards, must be bureaucratic. It would be diicult to point out any
e#amples o impudent e#clusiveness and arbitrariness on the part o oicials doin!
service under a chie o department who really served the people, as all our chies o
departments must be made to do. It would be easy, on the other hand, to adduce
other instances like that o the inluence o 5tein in 2russia, where the leadership o
one statesman imbued with true public spirit transormed arro!ant and perunctory
bureau# into public*spirited instruments o &ust !overnment.
The ideal or us is a civil service cultured and sel*suicient enou!h to act with sense
and vi!or, and yet so intimately connected with the popular thou!ht, by means o
elections and constant public counsel, as to ind arbitrariness o class spirit "uite out
o the "uestion.
III.
0avin! thus viewed in some sort the sub&ect*matter and the ob&ects o this study o
administration, what are we to conclude as to the methods best suited to it*the
points o view most advanta!eous or it-
1overnment is so near us, so much a thin! o our daily amiliar handlin!, that we can
with diiculty see the need o any philosophical study o it, or the e#act points o
such study, should be undertaken. ,e have been on our eet too lon! to study now
the art o walkin!. ,e are a practical people, made so apt, so adept in sel*
!overnment by centuries o e#perimental drill that we are scarcely any lon!er
capable o perceivin! the awkwardness o the particular system we may be usin!,
&ust because it is so easy or us to use any system. ,e do not study the art o
!overnin!% we !overn. )ut mere unschooled !enius or aairs will not save us rom
sad blunders in administration. Thou!h democrats by lon! inheritance and repeated
choice, we are still rather crude democrats. 'ld as democracy is, its or!ani$ation on
a basis o modern ideas and conditions is still an unaccomplished work. The
democratic state has yet to be e"uipped or carryin! those enormous burdens o
administration which the needs o this industrial and tradin! a!e are so ast
accumulatin!. ,ithout comparative studies in !overnment we cannot rid ourselves o
the misconception that administration stands upon an essentially dierent basis in a
democratic state rom that on which it stands in a non*democratic state.
Ater such study we could !rant democracy the suicient honor o ultimately
determinin! by debate all essential "uestions aectin! the public weal, o basin! all
structures o policy upon the ma&or will( but we would have ound but one rule o
!ood administration or all !overnments alike. 5o ar as administrative unctions are
concerned, all !overnments have a stron! structural likeness( more than that, i they
are to be uniormly useul and eicient, they must have a stron! structural likeness.
A ree man has the same bodily or!ans, the same e#ecutive parts, as the slave,
however dierent may be his motives, his services, his ener!ies. 7onarchies and
democracies, radically dierent as they are in other respects, have in reality much
the same business to look to.
It is abundantly sae nowadays to insist upon this actual likeness o all !overnments,
because these are days when abuses o power are easily e#posed and arrested, in
countries like our own, by a bold, alert, in"uisitive, detective public thou!ht and a
sturdy popular sel*dependence such as never e#isted beore. ,e are slow to
appreciate this( but it is easy to appreciate it. Try to ima!ine personal !overnment in
the +nited 5tates. It is like tryin! to ima!ine a national worship o Ceus. 'ur
ima!inations are too modern or the eat.
)ut, besides bein! sae, it is necessary to see that or all !overnments alike the
le!itimate ends o administration are the same, in order not to be ri!htened at the
idea o lookin! into orei!n systems o administration or instruction and su!!estion(
in order to !et rid o the apprehension that we mi!ht perchance blindly borrow
somethin! incompatible with our principles. That man is blindly astray who
denounces attempts to transplant orei!n systems into this country. It is impossible%
they simply would not !row here. )ut why should we not use such parts o orei!n
contrivances as we want, i they be in any way serviceable- ,e are in no dan!er o
usin! them in a orei!n way. ,e borrowed rice, but we do not eat it with chopsticks.
,e borrowed our whole political lan!ua!e rom En!land, but we leave the words
/kin!/ and /lords/ out o it. ,hat did we ever ori!inate, e#cept the action o the
ederal !overnment upon individuals and some o the unctions o the ederal
supreme court-
,e can borrow the science o administration with saety and proit i only we read all
undamental dierences o condition into its essential tenets. ,e have only to ilter it
throu!h our constitutions, only to put it over a slow ire o criticism and distil away
its orei!n !ases.
I know that there is a sneakin! ear in some conscientiously patriotic minds that
studies o European systems mi!ht si!nali$e some orei!n methods as better than
some American methods( and the ear is easily to be understood. )ut it would
scarcely be avowed in &ust any company.
It is the more necessary to insist upon thus puttin! away all pre&udices a!ainst
lookin! anywhere in the world but at home or su!!estions in this study, because
nowhere else in the whole ield o politics, it would seem, can we make use o the
historical, comparative method more saely than in this province o administration.
2erhaps the more novel the orms we study the better. ,e shall the sooner learn the
peculiarities o our own methods. ,e can never learn either our own weaknesses or
our own virtues by comparin! ourselves with ourselves. ,e are too used to the
appearance and procedure o our own system to see its true si!niicance. 2erhaps
even the En!lish system is too much like our own to be used to the most proit in
illustration. It is best on the whole to !et entirely away rom our own atmosphere
and to be most careul in e#aminin! such systems as those o ?rance and 1ermany.
5eein! our own institutions throu!h such media, we see ourselves as orei!ners
mi!ht see us were they to look at us without preconceptions. ' ourselves, so lon!
as we know only ourselves, we know nothin!.
6et it be noted that it is the distinction, already drawn, between administration and
politics which makes the comparative method so sae in the ield o administration.
,hen we study the administrative systems o ?rance and 1ermany, knowin! that we
are not in search o political principles, we need not care a peppercorn or the
constitutional or political reasons which ?renchmen or 1ermans !ive or their
practices when e#plainin! them to us. I I see a murderous ellow sharpenin! a knie
cleverly, I can borrow his way o sharpenin! the knie without borrowin! his probable
intention to commit murder with it( and so, i I see a monarchist dyed in the wool
mana!in! a public bureau well, I can learn his business methods without chan!in!
one o my republican spots. 0e may serve his kin!( I will continue to serve the
people( but I should like to serve my soverei!n as well as he serves his. )y keepin!
this distinction in view,*that is, by studyin! administration as a means o puttin! our
own politics into convenient practice, as a means o makin! what is democratically
politic towards all administratively possible towards each,*we are on perectly sae
!round, and can learn without error what orei!n systems have to teach us. ,e thus
devise an ad&ustin! wei!ht or our comparative method o study. ,e can thus
scrutini$e the anatomy o orei!n !overnments without ear o !ettin! any o their
diseases into our veins( dissect alien systems without apprehension o blood*
poisonin!.
'ur own politics must be the touchstone or all theories. The principles on which to
base a science o administration or America must be principles which have
democratic policy very much at heart. And, to suit American habit, all !eneral
theories must, as theories, keep modestly in the back!round, not in open ar!ument
only, but even in our own minds,*lest opinions satisactory only to the standards o
the library should be do!matically used, as i they must be "uite as satisactory to
the standards o practical politics as well. 4octrinaire devices must be postponed to
tested practices. Arran!ements not only sanctioned by conclusive e#perience
elsewhere but also con!enial to American habit must be preerred without hesitation
to theoretical perection. In a word, steady, practical statesmanship must come irst,
closet doctrine second. The cosmopolitan what*to*do must always be commanded by
the American how*to*do*it.
'ur duty is, to supply the best possible lie to a federal or!ani$ation, to systems
within systems( to make town, city, county, state, and ederal !overnments live with
a like stren!th and an e"ually assured healthulness, keepin! each un"uestionably its
own master and yet makin! all interdependent and co*operative combinin!
independence with mutual helpulness. The task is !reat and important enou!h to
attract the best minds.
This interlacin! o local sel*!overnment with ederal sel*!overnment is "uite a
modern conception. It is not like the arran!ements o imperial ederation in
1ermany. There local !overnment is not yet, ully, local self*!overnment. The
bureaucrat is everywhere busy. 0is eiciency sprin!s out o esprit de corps, out o
care to make in!ratiatin! obeisance to the authority o a superior, or at best, out o
the soil o a sensitive conscience. 0e serves, not the public, but an irresponsible
minister. The "uestion or us is, how shall our series o !overnments within
!overnments be so administered that it shall always be to the interest o the public
oicer to serve, not his superior alone but the community also, with the best eorts
o his talents and the soberest service o his conscience- 0ow shall such service be
made to his commonest interest by contributin! abundantly to his sustenance, to his
dearest interest by urtherin! his ambition, and to his hi!hest interest by advancin!
his honor and establishin! his character- And how shall this be done alike or the
local part and or the national whole-
I we solve this problem we shall a!ain pilot the world. There is a tendency*is there
not-* a tendency as yet dim, but already steadily impulsive and clearly destined to
prevail, towards, irst the conederation o parts o empires like the )ritish, and
inally o !reat states themselves. Instead o centrali$ation o power, there is to be
wide union with tolerated divisions o prero!ative. This is a tendency towards the
American type o !overnments &oined with !overnments or the pursuit o common
purposes, in honorary e"uality and honorable subordination. 6ike principles o civil
liberty are everywhere osterin! like methods o !overnment( and i comparative
studies o the ways and means o !overnment should enable us to oer su!!estions
which will practicably combine openness and vi!or in the administration o such
!overnments with ready docility to all serious, well*sustained public criticism, they
will have approved themselves worthy to be ranked amon! the hi!hest and most
ruitul o the !reat departments o political study. That they will issue in such
su!!estions I conidently hope.