Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 9.djvu/689

 A MODEL MUNICIPAL DEPARTMENT 665

gestions, as in the Department of Health, undoubtedly delays the proper enforcement of orders. The new method also seems to provide a superabundance of red tape, which likewise con- duces to delay.

Nevertheless, the new system does probably save much of the inspector's time by giving him a clear copy of the exact nature of the complaint. It also probably does away with a very pos- sible conflict in the wording and serving of orders, and tends toward greater uniformity of method something which may be of great advantage to the department, if the case is carried into court. Furthermore, it must be remembered that all of the inspectors may not always be either as honest or as efficient as they ought to be, and therefore it is perhaps better not to give them too much power or discretion. It is notorious that under the Tammany regime health inspectors, as well as countless other kinds of city officials, used their office as a means of collecting blackmail from private citizens; and such dangers must be guarded against, even under a reform administration. Besides, Tammany may come into power again at any time, and its oppor- tunities for dishonest dealings, which are especially great in the case of such city departments as those of health and tenements, ought to be curtailed as far as possible.

Still another reason for the new system established by Mr. Veiller in the Tenement House Department was doubtless the inefficiency of many of the present corps of inspectors. Indeed, it is a remarkable and striking fact to an outsider who has had the chance of studying some of the methods and results of the best of New York's departments of government under Mayor Low's administration, to observe the general wail of complaints against the present system and methods of holding competitive examinations. These protests come, too, from men who a year ago were, in many cases at least, ardent civil-service reformers. Most of their objections, to be sure, are concerned with the methods rather than the system of making appointments and pro- motions in the civil service. They say, and apparently with much reason, that many of the questions asked in the written examinations are utterly unpractical, and that the rating of the