PERSONNEL POLICY 649
of office of local officials.^4 Tu Yu of the eighth-century T'ang dynasty also dis-
liked the reduction of terms of office in the post-Han period from the nine-year
tenure system of district officials in antiquity to the six-year term of the Wei and
Chin, and the four-and later three-year terms of the Sui and T'ang, even though
each official was subject to an annual performance review.s
Liu Hsiang-tao. one of Emperor Kao-tsung's officials in the T'ang dynasty,
directed his ire against the same question. Since all officials were reviewed once
a year for a four-year telm of office and then transferred to another post, he blanIed
the declining prestige of the district magistrate on short terms and frequent trans-
fers. At the beginning of the eighth century, Lu Hui-shen insisted that longer
terms in office were essential to eliminating the competition for advancement
because in Chou times officials were appointed for life and their posts were passed
on to sons and grandsons, and those who proved most meritorious in their work
were not immediately promoted or transferred to other posts but received an
increase in salary or rank or a letter of congratulations. T'ang officials, however,
were kept in office one or two years at the longest, and as briefly as three to five
months. For that reason officials had no sense of honesty or shame, spent no
time in educating themselves in fundamental moral principles, and ignored the
task of providing relief to the destitute.^6
An undersecretary (Ytian-wai-Iang) in the Ministry of Personnel, Shen Chi-
ch'i, in 779 sought to extend the term of office beyond the standard four years
of Sui and the three years of carly T'ang. Although he praised Yao and Shun's
supposed use of the nine-year term, he toned down his demand to five years. He
also allowed for double promotions to give some leeway for the more rapid pro-
motion of men of exceptional talent. Otherwise all officials would have to com-
plete their terms of office before they eould be transferred.?
Appointment hr Pedigree. Bias in favor of men of aristocratic status was, of
course, one of the major problems of Choson Korea, but Yu had devoted much
space to this question in discussing education, recruitment, land distribution,
and military service. It was, therefore, not surprising that he should devote some
attention to the emergence of this question in personnel appointments in Chi-
nese history.
Yu particularly admired Lu Yti's attempts to rectify some of the evils that had
crept into the review and appointment process in the Ministry of Personnel after
the fall of the Han dynasty. Since personnel administrators were not sure of the
quality of candidates for office, they made recommendations on the basis of offi-
cial rank or showed favor to sons of prominent families or powerful men. Lu
wanted to eliminate favoritism and cutthroat competition by using recommen-
dation without consideration for rank and grade as the right method for recruit-
ment because it had proved etlective in Han times.R
Hsi Shen, an advocate of recommendation in the Chin dynasty (265-90),
criticized the use of favoritism and the influence of parents, relatives, and per-
sonal connections in personnel matters, and he blamed competition for office
for producing factions that distorted the truth. In ancient times feudal lords were