The National tribune. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1877-1917, 1885-08-06
"oF EQUAL STANDING.

4
Tanner, Dudley, Mosscrop, and Others, to Sc
cure definite recognition of the rights Of
| veterans under the laws of the State Of New
York. The matter came up in relation to
! the promotion of two Brooklyn fremen to
| the position of foremen. Under the law
| these promotions are to be made as the re-
suit of competitive examination. Some 46
| firemen were ordered before the Board for
| examination, aud of these Is passed the ex-
| animation to which they were subjected
| that is, they answered rs per cent. of the
questions propounded to them. Of these Is
| two were old soldiers, but the grade assigned
them by the examiners was 10 and 15-that
| is, at the bottom of the list. The Veterans
Rights Union held that these cases came
under the law which provides that in en-
ployment and promotion men who have been
honorably discharged from the military and
naval service of the United States shall be
preferred to those who have not so served,
oue VIM uay Ue VI S4udi st'suuiAS Inv
question then turned upon the matter of
equal standing The Veterans Rights Union
insisted that the whole IS who had passed
the required examination were of equal
standing, and consequently the soldiers
should have the preference over those who
might be rated higher on the list. On the
other hand Mayor Low and the Commission
ers insisted that equal standing meant only
those who had been given identical grades
by the examiner, and that the man who
stood No. on the list was not the equal of
the one who stood No. 1. The comrades of
the Veterans Rights Union pressed their
view so pertinaciously that at last meet
ing was called to lay the matter before the
Civil Service Commission of the State. The
meeting was held last week, when Comrade
Kay opened the argument on behalf of the
veterans by reading the section of the State
laws which prescribes the preference. After
this he said:
Our position is simply this: After the exan,ina-
ton every man who passes and is placed on the
eligible list is of equal standing under the law, and
if a soldier happen to be the last man the list he
should. under the law, be raised above all civilians
and placed first in the list for appointment. The
question of grade is immaterial, far soldiers
and sailors concerned. The word grade"
does not appear in the law giving them the prefer
ence. Regulation IL of the Brooklyn Civil Service
Rules however provides that candidates shall be
placed the list according to the grade which
they attain examination, the soldiers being pre-
ferred only over those of equal rating with them
selves. Now, the law says equal standing" and
we claim that the rule of equal rating must go
down. The Brooklyn Commission may interpret
the law, but they have no right to change word
in it to the prejudice of the rights of the soldiers.
He supported his argument by ruling of
the late Secretary Folger, in regard to the
case of Edwin A. Perry, a clerk in the New
York Custom House, who was candidate
for the position of Chief Clerk. He stood
third on the list at the examination, but
Secretary Folger held that his being dis
charged soldier gave him the preference. He
was consequently appointed to the place, and
Comrade Kay maintained that any soldier or
sailor who had passed the proper examina-
ton should be entitled to appointment,
though so civilians outranked him. Hon.
Augustus Schoonmaker asked Comrade
Kay:
Suppose this Commission decides that you are
right; would such construction of the law be
satisfactory to the Grand Army of the Republic
that they would ask for any additional Iegisla
ton, as they did last Winter?
To which that gentleman replied:
can only answer for myself to that question.
So far our Union is concerned our duty ends
here. If the Commission gives us what we claim
for these men ask more. Your construction
of the law will establish a rule for every city in the
State and if you give us the liberal construction
that we ask am sure that not only the soldiers but
the civilians of the State will heartily applaud your
decision.
Comrade Mosscrop argued that the law
assumes that every man who passed the
minimum is competent to discharge the
duties of the position for which he was ex-
amined, and, this being the case, the right of
the soldiers to preference was undoubted.
simply asked for their rights under the law.
Soldiers are not opposed to the Civil Service
examination, but they wanted to be treated
justly under it.
Corp. Tanner and others followed with
arguments of similar character. Mayor Low
recited the facts of the case, and said:
| The question is whether Rule IL, which pre-
| pared and this Commission approved, is in con-
| for;nity with the law. was unwilling to take the
ground that it is Illegal and for that reason have
ask ed you to pass upon it. Under that regulation
| the appointments which these gentlemen ask
| could not be made. What they demand is merely
passed examination for soldiers and sailors and
| competitive examination for civilians. Our Com
| mission has reached the conclusion that COMPETE
ton is the best safeguard of civil service and that
examination simply to declare man eligible to
| Office is passed examination and not competition
1 If the law gives the soldier the right which these
gentlemen claim, am shall all be very
| glad to accord it to him. We only want to know
| what the law does give him.
There was much interest felt in the matter
among the comrades everywhere, and at its
regular meeting Winchester Post, No. 1877,
adopted the following preamble and resoIu-
tions, which were presented by Comrade