TABLE 16. Showing by States numbers of those appointed in the departmental service and the apportionment to the States, Territories, and District of Columbia during the year ended June 30, 1890, and during the period from July 16, 1883, to June 30, 1890, and to December 31, 1890, on the basis of the Tenth Census.

The civil service act requires all appointments in the classified departmental service made through examination to be apportioned among the several States and Territories and the District of Columbia, upon the basis of population as ascertained at the last preceding census. It has been found impossible to make and maintain such an appor

tionment with mathematical exactness, but it has been equitably maintained with respect to most of the States. A very few of the States and nearly all of the Territories have received relatively an excessive share of appointments as compared to the other States. Nevada has had the least share of appointments. The excess is notable with respect to the District of Columbia, Colorado, Delaware, Maryland, and Virginia, and has resulted partly from the necessity of examining and certifying for appointment to places requiring special or technical knowledge or skill such persons as offered themselves after due public notice without regard to their places of legal residence, and persons who were entitled to preference under section 1754, Revised Statutes. Such persons have been found relatively in larger numbers in these States than elsewhere. There is little probability that any person will be appointed from the clerk or copyist register of any of these States during the year 1891. The Southern States have had their full share of the appointments made thus far. Except in the case of eligibles preferred under section 1754, Revised Statutes, the appointment under the clerk or copyist examination must always be from the State having eligibles which at the time has received the least proportional share of all the appointments. The manner in which that State is ascertained is as follows: The population of the United States under the census of 1890 is 62,622,250. This number is divided by 2,000, taken as a convenient basis of representation for future appointments. (The average number of appointments made each year is about 500.) On a basis of 2,000 appointments every 31,240 of population is entitled to one appointment. This ratio is applied in succession to the population of each State. The difference between the aggregate of the whole numbers thus obtained and the ratio of representation is made up by assigning to the States having the largest fractions additional numbers, the assignment ceasing when the total number of 2,000 is taken up.

Upon the adoption of this apportionment on November 19, 1890, each of the States and Territories, with the exception of Nevada, Utah, and Oklahoma had received an excess of this share in the previous apportionment of 1,500 appointments under the census of 1880, and the excess or deficit of each State or Territory was carried over to the new apportionment. An excess of 336 appointments was thus taken up. A request for a certification being received to fill either a clerk or copyist place the three names having the highest general averages of the sex and kind of examination named in the request would be certified from the State having the least proportional share of appointments. New York is entitled under the present census to 191 appointments in 2,000 appointments, Ohio to 117, Pennsylvania to 168, Wisconsin to 54, and Arkansas to 36. Of this number New York has received 12, Ohio 8, Pennsylvania 12, Wisconsin 4, and Arkansas 3. As between these States the share of New York is less than that of any of the others in proportion to population, New York is therefore first entitled to an appointment. The order of these States for certification for appointment would therefore be New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Arkansas. The calculation for all the States is made by a card system which shows at a glance their relative order for appointment at any moment. Under this method, in which the Commission has no discretion, the appointments at all times are as nearly equal among the States according to population as it is possible to apportion them. No State at any time has more than a very small excess of appointments over any other State. The supplementary and special examinations to some extent disarrange this procedure. When stenographers, bookkeepers, or persons having other special qualifications are called for, the eligibles standing highest from the whole country must be certified, except those from the few States which at the time have a certain large percentage of excess of appointments. The appointments from these registers and of persons preferred under section 1754, Revised Statutes, may therefore fall in a greater or less measure to States not having the least share of appointments. These States therefore receive a less share of the clerk and copyist appointments.

The whole number of appointments apportioned prior to June 30, 1890, was 2,371; of this number, 177 special pension examiners were apportioned by the Secretary of the Interior, under the provisions of Special Rules 3 and 4, between July 22, 1884, and July 14, 1886, since which last-mentioned date all appointments have been apportioned by the Commission.

The number of appointments which each State and Territory would have received in an exact apportionment of the 2,194 appointments apportioned by the Commission is shown in the above table. The table also shows the number actually received by each State and Territory.

The number of appointments charged to the District of Columbia early became so largely in excess of the number to which it was entitled under the apportionments that for four years and more no persons having a legal residence in the District have been examined unless there was an entire failure of applicants from elsewhere. The facilities now afforded for convenient examination will, it is hoped, tend to prevent this excess in the future.

It will be seen that 29 of the appointments received by the District of Columbia were from noncompetitive examinations, held under the provisions of General Rule III, section 2, clauses (b), (c), and (e), and Departmental Rule VIII.

In the case of noncompetitive examinations, where the person to be examined is nominated by the appointing officer, no restriction has been placed upon the examination of persons from States which had received an excessive share of appointments with the recent exception of persons from the District of Columbia.

The above table does not include 118 persons--all females-appointed to the grade of printer's assistant, Bureau of Engraving and Printing, for the reason that these appointments were not apportioned among the States and Territories. They were not appor tioned for two reasons, viz:

(1) It was thought that-the limited compensation paid these employés, coupled with the character of the work they are required to perform, would not attract persons from the remoter States and Territories. This alone would render such apportionment impracticable.

(2) It was deemed contrary to public policy to encourage women to leave the restraints of their homes, even though they be not remote, and come to this city where they would be exposed not only to the many temptations that beset the great majority of selfdependent women in cities, but to those temptations aggravated by circumstances attendant upon the effort to live comfortably and respectably upon an inadequate salary. For these reasons examinations for this grade have been held at Washington only, but open to all who possessed the requisite qualifications and who chose to apply.

As appointments to these places are made without geographical distribution by States, and a very large proportion of the persons appointed are therefore residents of the District of Columbia and adjoining States, their transfer or promotion to the clerical grades in which appointments are apportioned would, to the extent to which it should be carried, increase the number of appointments from these States and the District, already largely in excess of the proportion to which they are fairly entitled, and thus defeat an equitable apportionment to all the States and Territories. In view of the character of the service, the conditions under which it must be rendered, the small compensation paid, and the fact that women are the employés, it seems not only impracticable to apportion these appointments among the States and Territories, but it would be contrary to public policy to attempt it. These places, which are of a semi-mechanical character, can not therefore properly be made entrance places to the higher grades of the service