III

Efficiency and Economy Would be Promoted in General or Overhead Administration, in Elimination of Duplication, in Effective Utilization of Plant and Personnel, and in Standardization of Specifications and Procedure

In general or overhead administration advantages would follow through assembling under one head those services which have primary functions in the same field. The general direction would be vested in a single head selected for his qualifications for the task of accomplishing the purposes in view and able to devote his whole attention to the department, instead of having his energies divided among services of an unrelated character. Likewise, in institutional activities, i. e., those having to do with the maintenance and operation of the services as such and including appointment and management of personnel, the purchase and issue of supplies, the keeping of accounts and the rendition of reports, there would be similar advantages in economy and efficiency; for such matters could be centralized instead of being performed by each subordinate agency for itself with the waste that is inevitable, the operations in question would be performed in accordance with the same general principles, and purely business methods and procedure would be standardized and made uniform.

Duplication may exist in several forms. It may be found in organization, personnel and plant or in the work that is done. Two or more agencies with separate organizations may perform different though related categories of work which could be more economically done by a single organization. In such a case there is no duplication of work, although duplication of organization, personnel and plant may be serious. In other instances one service may perform an activity which could be more efficiently and economically performed by another service. Among the services which would be assembled in a Department of Public Works there may be no duplication of work but there undoubtedly are duplications of organization, personnel, and plant. Just how serious this duplication may be could be ascertained after the department is set up, when coordination could best be obtained with the different services under one directing head.

Possibilities for more effective utilization of plant and personnel are obvious. With construction and engineering services scattered in different departments one may have to acquire expensive plant, tools, and quipment although another service already possesses them and is not at the time putting them to use Engineering equipment and materials are employed on a large scale, and the consequences of its unnecessary duplication are proportionately costly. With the services in one department, working relations could be created such that one service could drawn upon another for assistance in facilities and personnel as the occasion might arise.

Standarization of specifications and procedure having to do with purely business activities is now recognized by private business concerns as highly desirable. It is especially advantageous in construction work. The recent progress made by the government, through the Bureau of Standards and in cooperation with private engineering and other agencies, has been very substantial and, especially in engineering standards, would be facilitated by having the government's engineering services under one head. There would also be progress toward greater uniformity in preparation of proposals for bids, in the drafting of contracts, and in the subsequent interpretation of contracts.

IV

Economy and Efficiency Would be Promoted in Other Departments Which Would be Relieved of Public Works Services

In assessing the advantages to be derived from the creation of a Department of Public Works it is desirable to consider, not only the benefits that wil! accrue to the services directly affected, but those that will incidentally be conferred upon the services from which they will be dissociated. Under present conditions the heads of departments in which public works services are located are compelled to give a part of their thought and time to the affairs of these services. The Secretary of War thus has his attention distracted from his primary responsibilities, which relate to military affairs, in order to consider matters of a purely civil character related in no direct way to such responsibilities. The Secretary of the Treasury must in the same way consider matters affecting the office of the Supervising Architect having to do with the creation and maintenance of public buildings, though these matters do not concern in any way his fundamental problem of administering the financial affairs of the government. The Secretary of Agriculture must in like manner concern himself with the purely engineering functions of the Bureau of Public Roads.

All of these officers are now overburdened with responsibilities and duties directly affecting their primary responsibilities. It is quite possible that the advantages to such departments as have been mentioned that would follow the creation of a Department of Public Works would equal, if not surpass, those conferred upon the services directly affected.

V

A Corps of Civilian Engineers Would be Made Possible and Would be of Public Advantage Both in Peace and in War

One of the great problems of the government is to obtain and keep the services of competent technical and administrative officials. This problem can be solved only by offering a career that is permanent and that affords proper opportunities for advancement. Such a career is possible only when a governmental service is on a considerable scale. The setting up of a Department of Public Works would mean that engineering officials in the department would have open to them opportunities for advancement in the whole of the department, instead of within the confines of a small service which may at present be the only engineering agency in its department. Engineering schools could then provide training for government service. Qualifications for entrance to the service and for promotion could be worked out. Competent men would enter the service and remain. The professional standards in government service would be raised, morale would be strengthened, and benefits would accrue both to the public and to the engineering profession. A strong Department of Public Works would in this manner and in other ways constitute an important measure of military preparedness. If the government has mobilized in one department engineering ability and facilities for undertaking construction and engineering work on a large scale, its position in the event of war, with its modern requirements, will be greatly strengthened.

ARGUMENTS IN THE NEGATIVE

I

The Proposal is Too Vague for Adoption

Any plan that is brought forward for organic changes in the executive part of the federal government involves matters of such public importance that it should be concrete and its application made apparent. In this instance a general idea is presented, without practical and definite elaboration. Definiteness would seem especially appropriate in connection with matters of engineering concern and originating with engineers.

It is true that a bill has been drawn and introduced in Congress, but when queries are raised about the contents of the bill they are avoided by statements that the question is not about the bill but only with respect to the general principle. Consequently, intelligent criticism is made difficult.

Judgment may well be reserved until specific proposals are elaborated.

II

Reorganization of the Executive Department of the Federal Government Should Proceed Upon Examination of the Functions of All Its Parts and Not by Piecemeal

Part of the argument for the proposed department rests upon assertion that the administrative branch of the United States government has been put together in a haphazard way, without proper correlations, and that the organization of the new department will be a remedial step for this condition. The validity of this conclusion may be doubted. If there is such a lack of proper organization as has been described, adequate procedure would require a general study of all parts of the government's activities and formulation of plans for any necessary correlation. England found it possible to have a commission study its governmental organization even during war, and we should find it at least equally possible, if there is need, to study our organization during the period of transition to peace conditions.

Attempts at reorganization upon a partial survey of the subject, and with reference to but a part of the governmental machinery, may lead to additional complexity, with added cost to the public. The present proposal, if adopted, may lead to creation of an additional department, for a reassignment of some services in the present Interior Department may prove impossible. This difficulty will be recognized when it is recalled that, in an endeavor to solve problems of this kind, some advocates of a Department of Public Works have suggested that the Bureau of Education should be placed in the Department of Labor

Creation of one new department will undoubtedly make the way easier for advocates of other new departments, with constantly widening federal intervention and jurisdiction in matters heretofore of state and local concern. If a Department of Public Works is advocated, a Department of Education and a Department of Public Health, in favor of both of which there has already been agitation, will be urged. For both of these departments bills have been introduced in Congress, and there is a bill for an Air Department, as well as proposals for a Secretary of National Defense.

The result will be, not simplification in governmental agencies, but multiplication. As the heads of new departments, eventually if not immediately, will certainly be given seats in the Cabinet, that body already rather too large and unwieldy will become of decreasing importance. During the war England found its cabinet had grown to such size that its usefulness was impaired and for efficiency had to organize a supercabinet of five members.

At the same time, creation of new departments will mean an increasing of federal activities at a moment when there should be a decrease and the extraordinary activities undertaken in support of war should be abandoned instead of being perpetuated. The tendency of the proposal for a new department is already apparent through endeavors which are being made to prevent all construction activities of the War Department from being concentrated in the hands of the Engineer Corps; instead, it is being urged in some quarters that the Construction Division, which was organized during the war as a special agency to have charge of building cantonments, etc., should be made permanent, and should direct the activities of a new Construction Corps of 250 officers and 8,000 men.

Such a movement has many of the appearances of an attempt to perpetuate a special war agency. Arguments have not been brought forward to indicate why the Engineer Corps could not perform th duties of the proposed Construction Division. The officers in the Engineer Corps are selected from the men

of highest standing at West Point. During the War the Engineer Corps performed all construction in France, where the program of building compared in variety and magnitude, and in difficulties regarding materials and labor surpassed, the program in the United States for which the Construction Division was responsible storage space constructed in France was nine-tenths of the space constructed at home, hospital capacity was twice the capacity constructed in the United States, and the development of port and railroad facilities, with their repair and operation, was on a large scale. Considerations which are usually given weight in such connections would seem to point to the advisability of placing all Army construction in the hands of the Army engineers.

III

Inefficiency in Present Arrangements of Engineering and Construction Services Has Not been Demonstrated

There has been no demonstration that engineering and construction works are not properly performed by present government agencies. Reference is sometimes made to the Panama Canal, as an engineering work that might be maintained and operated by the new department. Aside from special difficulties in this proposal, since the operation of the Canal is only a portion of the function performed by our government at the Isthmus of Panama, it is apparently not recalled that the construction of the canal was achieved by Army engineers after several civilian engineers of undoubted distinction had given up the task. It would be appropriate to ask how the Engineer Corps of the Army has since proved deficient, if it is contemplated to change its jurisdiction over works of any character.

IV

Economy Would Not be Promoted but Expenditures Would be Enlarged

The proposal is to create a large engineering organization merely by assembling engineering services in one department. It goes without saying that such a procedure will save no expense, but will increase the overhead, which is rather heavy under the bill which has been drawn; for each of the special assistant secretaries will inevitably build up a personal organization of clerks and the like for himself.

In fact, there will be an immediate and large increase in cost to the government by reason of another factor. If the Forest Service wishes a few miles of telephone line installed, it will no longer be possible for it to proceed at once with its own personnel, using very largely the time and ability of officials and employees who are not primarily employed for construction; on the contrary, it will have to summon the Department of Public Works, which will incur the expense of sending its men to the spot where the other service's men already are, and perhaps waiting idly until this piece of construction work is done. Even if it is said that this sort of thing will not happen as to small matters, the natural professional interest of the Public Works Department will incline it strongly in this direction. The result will be delay and expenditure of large amounts of time and money in unproductive ways.

It is to be recalled that, because of differences in functions, one department always finds it difficult to have another department perform work for it. The division in authority and responsibility which results from such attempts has consequences which deer rather than promote such cooperation.

If it is remarked in this connection that it is not business-like to have friction between parts of the government, it may be replied that the government is not conducted for business purposes, but for purposes wholly different, that the functions of its parts may be very unalike, and that this is the circumstance which causes the apparent difficulty.

V

Public Works Department at Best Would be a Misnomer

The United States does not have public works of the kind described in Arguments in the Affirmative, of sufficient importance, and suitable for transfer, to warrant the setting up of a Department of Public Works. If the new department is to have merely governmental works there surely can be no reason for assigning its head a place in the Cabinet. Unless the federal government intends to enter upon policies of public ownership and operation which are not now apparent, the suggested title for the new agency would seem to be inappropriate.

VI

Competent Engineering Services Can in Other and More Appropriate Ways be Obtained by the Government

Organization of a new department of itself will not give engineering officials higher compensation or increased permanency in their employment. Entrance upon engineering duties, and permanence of position, are today capable of being dealt with under the civil service law. As for compensation, engineering officials are not the only government employees who assert they are underpaid. The employees of practically every government service have the same point of view; patent examiners, customs inspectors, postal clerks, and other grades of officials and employees have started agitation upon their own behalf. All of them may deserve increases in salary, but in the public interest the compensation of government officials and employees should not be considered by groups and made dependent upon different principles but the question of proper compensation should be taken up with relation to government service as a whole. In fact, this is what has been done, through a joint committee of Congress which after a year's study has recently submitted a report with recommendations for the rates of compensation to be paid in all portions of the federal government's services.

VII

Governmental Organization Must for Success be Functional and Engineering is not a Function

The proposal may involve a fundamental error with respect to the nature of engineering. Engineering in all its branches is a profession. It exists for the service it can render toward the accomplishment of purposes wholly apart from engineering.

Proper governmental organization contemplates purposes. The responsible head of a government agency has to account for his success in attaining its purpose. For assistance he properly utilizes professional services of lawyers, of engineers, of accountants, and of other technical and professional men according to the nature of the purpose. But legal work, engineering work, and other professional efforts do not in themselves constitute functions; they are rather technique. Just as the Bureau of Internal Revenue has as its function the collection of taxes, in which it finds legal services indispensable, so the Reclamation Service has as its function the reclamation of arid lands for agriculture uses, in which it must have engineering assistance and even some legal advice. At times in government service technique is made more prominent than function. There would be such a reversal of the correct state of affairs if the Bureau of Internal Revenue became more engrossed in raising interesting legal points in the courts than in collecting taxes, or the Reclamation Service gave greater importance to performing engineering feats than to irrigating lands susceptible of profitable cultivation. Any reorganization of governmental bureaus which will emphasize the technical side of governmental activities may be contrary to the public interest; emphasis should rather be placed upon considerations of practicability and utility.

VIII

In Addition to Considerations Referring to the General Proposal There are Special Questions that Arise in Connection with Having the Department of Public Works Perform Engineering Work for Other Services

Difficulties may develop, by reason of distinctions between functions and means used to perform functions, if a Department of Public Works undertook to act for other agencies of the government or if a question is raised about the future of some existing agencies which would have to be moved if the nature of the present Interior Department were changed. These possibilities may be noticed here because they are raised by arguments advanced by some advocates of the new department.

Possible difficulties in connection with the Office of Indian Affairs will serve for illustration. This bureau is the agency through which the government performs its functions of guardianship and trusteeship for Indians while they are being brought to the status of citizens able to hold their own place in the body of citizens. Tribal property alone held under this trusteeship exceeds a quarter of a billion of dollars in value, and individual Indians' property aggregates very much higher values. In private affairs probably no one would suggest that, because a guardian and trustee for a child had occasion to utilize the services of a lawyer and of an engineer in managing the estate and of a teacher for purposes of instruction, the guardian and trustee should withdraw altogether; for the function of the guardian and trustee is readily acknowledged as paramount. Yet, in the case of the Office of Indian Affairs, some advocates of the new